[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 25 (Monday, February 7, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6925-6929]
[FR Doc No: 2022-02430]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-94124; File No. SR-BOX-2022-05]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BOX Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend BOX Rule
7170 (Nullification and Adjustment of Options Transactions Including
Obvious Errors) To Improve the Operation of the Rule

February 1, 2022.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''), and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, notice is hereby given that on
January 26. 2022, BOX Exchange LLC (the ``Exchange'') filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule
change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been
prepared by the self-regulatory organization. The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule from
interested persons.

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend BOX Rule 7170 (Nullification and
Adjustment of Options Transactions including Obvious Errors) to improve
the operation of the Rule. The text of the proposed rule change is
available from the principal office of the Exchange, at the
Commission's Public Reference Room and also on the Exchange's internet
website at http://boxoptions.com.

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 self-regulatory organization
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 self-regulatory organization
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 Exchange proposes to amend BOX Rule 7170 (Nullification and
Adjustment of Options Transactions including Obvious Errors) to improve
the operation of the Rule. This is a competitive filing that is based
on a proposal recently submitted by NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'') and
approved by the Commission.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-93818 (December
17, 2021), 86 FR 73009 (December 23, 2021) (SR-NYSEArca-2021-91)
(Order Approving a Proposed Rule Change to Amend Rule 6.87-O).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Following discussions with other exchanges and a cross-section of
industry participants and in coordination with the Listed Options
Market Structure Working Group (``LOMSWG'') (collectively, the
``Industry Working Group''), the Exchange proposes: (1) To amend
section (b)(3) of the Rule to permit the Exchange to determine the
Theoretical Price \2\ of a Customer \3\ option transaction in a wide
market so long as a narrow market exists at any point during the 10-
second period after an opening or re-opening; and (2) to amend section
(c)(4)(B) of the Rule to adjust, rather than nullify, Customer
transactions in Obvious Error situations, provided the adjustment does
not violate the limit price.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See Exchange Rule 7170(b).
    \3\ For purposes of Rule 7170, the term ``Customer'' does not
include any broker-dealer or Professional Customer. See Exchange
Rule 7170(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Change to Section (b)(3)
    Exchange Rule 7170 has been part of various harmonization efforts
by the Industry Working Group.\4\ These efforts

have often centered around the Theoretical Price for which an options
transaction should be compared to determine whether an Obvious Error
has occurred. For instance, all options exchanges have adopted language
comparable to IM-7170-5, Exchange Determining Theoretical Price,\5\
which explains how an exchange is to determine Theoretical Price at the
open, when there are no valid quotes, and when there is a wide quote.
This includes at times the use of a singular third-party vendor, known
as a TP Provider (currently CBOE Livevol, LLC).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 74911 (May 8,
2015), 80 FR 27717 (May 14, 2015) (SR-BOX-2015-18); 80247 (March 15,
2017), 82 FR 14589 (March 21, 2017) (SR-BOX-2017-08).
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81351 (August 8,
2017), 82 FR 37920 (August 14, 2017) (SR-BOX-2017-25).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Similarly, section (b)(3) of Rule 7170 was previously harmonized
across all options exchanges to handle situations where executions
occur in markets that are wide (as set forth in the rule).\6\ Under
that section, the Exchange determines the Theoretical Price if the NBBO
\7\ for the subject series is wide immediately before execution and a
narrow market (as set forth in the rule) existed ``during the 10
seconds prior to the transaction.'' The rule goes on to clarify that,
should there be no narrow quotes ``during the 10 seconds prior to the
transaction,'' the Theoretical Price for the affected series is the
NBBO that existed at the time of execution (regardless of its width).
In recent discussions, the Industry Working Group has identified
proposed changes to section (b)(3) of Rule 7170 that would improve the
Rule's functioning. Currently, section (b)(3) does not permit the
Exchange to determine the Theoretical Price unless there is a narrow
quote 10 seconds prior to the transaction. However, in the first
seconds of trading, there is no 10-second period ``prior to the
transaction.'' Further, the Industry Working Group has observed that
prices in certain series can be disjointed at the start of trading.
Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to provide additional protections to
trading in certain circumstances immediately after the opening before
liquidity has had a chance to enter the market. The Exchange proposes
to amend section (b)(3) to allow the Exchange to determine the
Theoretical Price in a wide market so long as a narrow market exists at
any point during the 10-second period after an opening or reopening.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See supra note 6.
    \7\ The term ``NBBO'' means the national best bid or offer as
calculated by the Exchange based on market information received by
the Exchange from OPRA. See Exchange Rule 100.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, the Exchange proposes that the existing text of
section (b)(3) would become subsection ``(A).'' The Exchange proposes
to add the following heading and text as subsection ``(B)'':

    (B) Customer Transactions Occurring Within 10 Seconds or Less
After an Opening or Re-Opening:
    (i) The Exchange will determine the Theoretical Price if the
bid/ask differential of the NBB and NBO for the affected series just
prior to the Customer's erroneous transaction was equal to or
greater than the Minimum Amount set forth in paragraph A above and
there was a bid/ask differential less than the Minimum Amount during
the 10 seconds prior to the transaction.
    (ii) If there was no bid/ask differential less than the Minimum
Amount during the 10 seconds prior to the transaction, then the
Exchange will determine the Theoretical Price if the bid/ask
differential of the NBB and NBO for the affected series just prior
to the Customer's erroneous transaction was equal to or greater than
the Minimum Amount set forth in paragraph A above and there was a
bid/ask differential less than the Minimum Amount anytime during the
10 seconds after an opening or re-opening.
    (iii) If there was no bid/ask differential less than the Minimum
Amount during the 10 seconds following an Opening or Re-Opening,
then the Theoretical Price of an option series is the last NBB or
NBO just prior to the Customer transaction in question, as set forth
in paragraph (b) above.
    (iv) Customer transactions occurring more than 10 seconds after
an opening or re-opening are subject to paragraph A above.

    The following examples illustrate the functioning of the proposed
rule change. Consider that the NBBO of a series opens as $0.01 at
$4.00. A marketable limit order to buy one contract arrives one second
later and is executed at $4.00. In the third second of trading, the
NBBO narrows from $0.01 at $4.00 to $2.00 at $2.10. While the execution
occurred in a market with wide widths, there was no tight market within
the 10 seconds prior to execution. Accordingly, under the current rule,
the trade would not qualify for Obvious Error review, in part due to
the fact that there was only a single second of trading before the
execution. Under the proposal, since a tight market existed at some
point in the first 10 seconds of trading (i.e., in the third second),
the Exchange would be able to determine the Theoretical Price as
provided in IM-7170-5. As another example, the NBBO for a series opens
as $0.01 at $4.00. In the seventh second of trading, a marketable limit
order is received to buy one contract and is executed at $4.00. Five
seconds later (i.e., in the twelfth second of trading), the NBBO
narrows from $0.01 at $4.00 to $2.00 at $2.10. While the execution
occurred in a market with wide widths, there was no tight market within
10 seconds prior to execution. Accordingly, under the current rule, the
trade would not qualify for Obvious Error review. Under the proposal,
since no tight market existed at any point during the first 10 seconds
of trading (i.e., the narrow market occurred in the twelfth second),
the trade would not qualify for Obvious Error review. The proposed rule
change would also better harmonize section (b)(3) with section (b)(1)
of the Rule. Under section (b)(1), the Exchange is permitted to
determine the Theoretical Price for transactions occurring as part of
the opening auction process (as described in Exchange Rule 7170) if
there is no NBB or NBO for the affected series just prior to the
erroneous transaction. However, under the current version of section
(b)(3), a core trading transaction could occur in the same wide market
but the Exchange would not be permitted to determine the Theoretical
Price. Consider an example where one second after the Exchange opens a
selected series, the NBBO is $1.00 at $5.00. At 9:30:03, a customer
submits a marketable buy order to the Exchange and pays $5.00. At
9:30:03, a different exchange runs an opening auction that results in a
customer paying $5.00 for the same selected series. At 9:30:06, the
NBBO changes from $1.00 at $5.00 to $1.35 at $1.45. Under the current
version of section (b)(3), the Exchange would not be able to determine
the Theoretical Price for the trade occurring during core trading.
However, the trade on the other exchange could be submitted for review
under (b)(1) and that exchange would be able to determine the
Theoretical Price. If the proposed change to section (b)(3) were
approved, both of the trades occurring at 9:30:03 (on the Exchange
during core trading and on another exchange via auction) would also be
entitled to the same review regarding the same Theoretical Price based
upon the same time.
    The proposal would not change any Obvious Error review beyond the
first 10 seconds of an opening or re-opening.
Proposed Change to Section (c)(4)(B)
    The Exchange proposes to amend section (c)(4)(B)--the ``Adjust or
Bust'' rule for Customer transactions in Obvious Error situations--to
adjust rather than nullify such orders, provided the adjustment does
not violate the Customer's limit price.
    Currently, the Rule provides that in Obvious Error situations,
transactions involving non-Customers should be adjusted, while
transactions involving Customers are nullified, unless a certain
condition applies.\8\ The Industry

Working Group has concluded that the treatment of these transactions
should be harmonized under the Rule, such that transactions involving
Customers may benefit from adjustment, just as non-Customer
transactions currently do, except where such adjustment would violate
the Customer's limit price; in that instance, the trade would be
nullified.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Specifically, the current Rule provides at section (c)(4)(C)
that if any Participant has 200 or more Customer transactions under
review concurrently and the orders resulting in such transactions
were submitted during the course of 2 minutes or less, where at
least one party to the Obvious Error is a non-Customer, then the
Exchange will apply the non-Customer adjustment criteria set forth
in (c)(4)(A) for such transactions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, the Exchange proposes to amend the text of section
(c)(4)(B) to add that where at least one party to the Obvious Error is
a Customer, ``the execution price of the transaction will be adjusted
by the Official pursuant to the table immediately above. Any Customer
Obvious Error exceeding 50 contracts will be subject to the Size
Adjustment Modifier defined in subparagraph (a)(4) above. However, if
such adjustment(s) would result in an execution price higher (for buy
transactions) or lower (for sell transactions) than the Customer's
limit price,'' the trade will be nullified. The ``table immediately
above'' referenced in the proposed text refers to the table at current
Section (c)(4)(A), which provides for the adjustment of prices a
specified amount away from the Theoretical Price, rather than adjusting
the Theoretical Price.
    The Exchange proposes no other changes at this time.
Implementation Date
    The proposed rule change will become operative no sooner than six
months following the approval of the NYSE Arca proposal \9\ to coincide
with implementation on other option exchanges. The Exchange will
announce the implementation date to its Participants via Regulatory
Circular.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 93818 (December 17,
2021), 86 FR 73009 (December 23, 2021) (SR-NYSEArca-2021-91) (Order
Approving a Proposed Rule Change to Amend Rule 6.87-O).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with the
requirements of Section 6(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\10\ in general, and Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\11\ in
particular, in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with
persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, to remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system, and, in general to protect investors and the
public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change to section (b)(3) of
the Rule would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system, and, in general,
protect investors and the public interest because it provides a method
for addressing Obvious Error Customer transactions that occur in a wide
market at the opening of trading. Generally, a wide market is an
indication of a lack of liquidity in the market such that the market is
unreliable. Current section (b)(3) recognizes that a persistently wide
quote (i.e., more than 10 seconds) should be considered the reliable
market regardless of its width, but does not address transactions that
occur in a wide market in the first seconds of trading, where there is
no preceding 10-second period to reference. Accordingly, in the first
10 seconds of trading, there is no opportunity for a wide quote to have
persisted for a sufficiently lengthy period such that the market should
consider it a reliable market for the purposes of determining an
Obvious Error transaction.
    The proposed change would rectify this disparity and permit the
Exchange to consider whether a narrow quote is present at any time
during the 10-second period after an opening or reopening. The presence
of such a narrow quote would indicate that the market has gained
sufficient liquidity and that the previous wide market was unreliable,
such that it would be appropriate for the Exchange to determine the
Theoretical Price of an Obvious Error transaction. In this way, the
proposed rule harmonizes the treatment of Customer transactions that
execute in an unreliable market at any point of the trading day, by
making them uniformly subject to Exchange determination of the
Theoretical Price.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed change to section (c)(4)(B)
of the Rule would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system and enhance the
protection of investors by harmonizing the treatment of non-Customer
transactions and Customer transactions under the Rule. Under the
current Rule, Obvious Error situations involving non-Customer
transactions are adjusted, while those involving Customer transactions
are generally nullified, unless they meet the additional requirements
of section (c)(4)(C) (i.e., where a Participant has 200 or more
Customer transactions under review concurrently and the orders
resulting in such transactions were submitted during the course of 2
minutes or less.) The proposal would harmonize the treatment of non-
Customer and Customer transactions by providing for the adjustment of
all such transactions, except where such adjustment would violate the
Customer's limit price.
    When it proposed the current rule in 2015, the Exchange believed
there were sound reasons for treating non-Customer transactions and
Customer transactions differently. At the time, the Exchange stated its
belief that ``Customers are not necessarily immersed in the day-today
trading of the markets, are less likely to be watching trading activity
in a particular option throughout the day, and may have limited funds
in their trading accounts,'' and that nullifying Obvious Error
transactions involving Customers would give Customers ``greater
protections'' than adjusting such transactions by eliminating the
possibility that a Customer's order will be adjusted to a significantly
different price. The Exchange also noted its belief that ``Customers
are . . . less likely to have engaged in significant hedging or other
trading activity based on earlier transactions, and thus, are less in
need of maintaining a position at an adjusted price than non-
Customers.'' \12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74911 (May 8,
2015), 80 FR 27717 (May 14, 2015) (SR-BOX-2015-18).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Those assumptions about Customer trading and hedging activity no
longer hold. The Exchange and the Industry Working Group believe that
over the course of the last five years, Customers that use options have
become more sophisticated, as retail broker-dealers have enhanced the
trading tools available. Pursuant to OCC data, volumes clearing in the
Customer range have expanded from 12,022,163 ADV in 2015 to 35,081,130
ADV in 2021. This increase in trading activity underscores the greater
understanding of options by Customers as a trading tool and its use in
the markets. Customers who trade options today largely are more
educated, have better trading tools, and have better access to
financial news than any time prior.\13\ The proposed rule would extend
the hedging protections currently enjoyed by non-Customers to
Customers, by allowing them to maintain an option position at an

adjusted price, which would in turn prevent a cascading effect by
maintaining the hedge relationship between the option transaction and
any other transactions in a related security.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Dan Raju, Retail Traders Adopt Options En Masse, by Dan
Raju, (Dec 8, 2020) available at https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/retail-traders-adopt-options-en-masse-2020-12-08.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that extending such hedging protections to
Customer transactions would remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system and
enhance the protection of investors by providing greater certainty of
execution for all participants to options transactions. Under the
current Rule, a Customer that believes its transaction was executed
pursuant to an Obvious Error may be disincentivized from submitting the
transaction for review, since during the review process, the Customer
would be uncertain whether the trade would be nullified, and if so,
whether market conditions would still permit the opportunity to execute
a related order at a better price after the nullification ruling is
finalized. In contrast, under the proposed rule, the Customer would
know that the only likely outcomes of submitting a trade to Obvious
Error review would be that the trade would stand or be re-executed at a
better price; the trade would only be nullified if the adjustment would
violate the order's limit. Similarly, under the current Rule, during
the review period, a market maker who traded contra to the Customer
would be uncertain if it should retain any position executed to hedge
the original trade, or attempt to unwind it, possibly at a significant
loss. Under the proposed rule change, this uncertainty is largely
eliminated, and the question would be whether the already-executed and
hedged trade would be adjusted to a better price for the Customer, or
if it would stand as originally executed. In this way, the proposed
rule enhances the protection of investors and removes impediments to
and perfects the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system.
    The proposed rule also addresses the concern the Exchange cited in
its 2015 filing that adjusting, rather than nullifying, Customer
transactions could lead to a Customer's order being adjusted to a
significantly different price. To address that concern, the proposed
rule would prevent Customer transactions from being adjusted to a price
that violates the order's limit; if the adjustment would violate a
Customer's limit, the trade would instead be nullified. The Exchange
believes it is in the best interest of investors to expand the
availability of adjustments to Customer transactions in all Obvious
Error situations except where the adjustment would violate the
Customer's limit price. Further, the Exchange believes that, with
respect to such proposed adjustments to Customer transactions, it is
appropriate to use the same form of adjustment as is currently in place
with respect to non-Customer transactions as laid out in the table in
section (c)(4)(A). That is, the Exchange believes that it is
appropriate to adjust to prices a specified amount away from the
Theoretical Price rather than to adjust the Theoretical Price, even
though the Exchange has determined a given trade to be erroneous in
nature, because the parties in question should have had some
expectation of execution at the price or prices submitted. Also, it is
common that by the time it is determined that an Obvious Error has
occurred, additional hedging and trading activity has already occurred
based on the executions that previously happened. The Exchange believes
that providing an adjustment to the Theoretical Price in all cases
would not appropriately incentivize market participants to maintain
appropriate controls to avoid potential errors, while adjusting to
prices a specified amount away from the Theoretical Price would
incentivize such behavior. The Exchange believes that the proposal is
not designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers,
issuers, brokers, or dealers. The proposed change to section (b)(3)
would apply to all instances of a wide market occurring within the
first 10 seconds of trading followed by a narrow market at any point in
the subsequent 10-second period, regardless of the types of market
participants involved in such transactions. The proposed change to
section (c)(4)(B) would harmonize the treatment of Obvious Error
transactions involving Customers and non-Customers, no matter what type
of market participants those parties may be. For these reasons, the
Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with the Act.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. In this regard and as indicated
above, the Exchange notes that the rule change is being proposed as a
competitive response to a filing submitted by NYSE Arca that was
recently approved by the Commission.\14\ The Exchange anticipates that
the other options exchanges will adopt substantively similar proposals,
such that there would be no burden on intermarket competition from the
Exchange's proposal. Accordingly, the proposed change is not meant to
affect competition among the options exchanges. For these reasons, the
Exchange believes that the proposed rule change reflects this
competitive environment and does not impose any undue burden on
intermarket competition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See supra, note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 comments on the
proposed rule change.

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

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \15\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) \16\ thereunder, the Exchange has designated this proposal as
one that effects a change that: (i) Does not significantly affect the
protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) does not impose
any significant burden on competition; and (iii) by its terms, does not
become operative for 30 days after the date of the filing, or such
shorter time as the Commission may designate if consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-BOX-2022-05 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR- BOX-2022-05. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (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 website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-BOX-2022-05 and should be submitted on
or before February 28, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\17\
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-02430 Filed 2-4-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: April 25, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 79)]
[Notices]
[Page 23917]
[DOCID:fr25ap06-68]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER06-18-000]

Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.; Second
Supplemental Notice of Technical Conference

April 14, 2006.
    As announced in the Notices of Technical Conference issued on March
17, 2006 and April 6, 2006, the Commission will hold a technical
conference on April 21, 2006 in the Commission Meeting Room of the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC, regarding the Midwest Independent Transmission System
Operator Inc.'s (Midwest ISO) proposed cost allocation policy, as it
pertains to the degree of regional cost sharing for reliability
projects at 345 kV and above, pursuant to the Commission Order issued
on February 3, 2006.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc., 114
FERC ] 61,106 (2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The technical conference will begin at 1 p.m. (EDT) and conclude at
approximately 5:15 p.m. Members and staff of the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission are expected to participate. The conference will
be open for the public to attend and advanced registration is not
required.
    This second supplemental notice provides additional information
regarding the panelists who will speak at the technical conference.
    The conference will be transcribed. A transcript of the conference
will be immediately available from Ace Reporting Company ((202) 347-
3700 or<PHONE_NUMBER>) for a fee. It will be available for the public
on the Commission's eLibrary system seven (7) calendar days after FERC
receives the transcript. Additionally, Capitol Connection offers the
opportunity for remote listening and viewing of the conference. It is
available for a fee, live over the Internet, by phone or via satellite.
Persons interested in receiving the broadcast or who need information
on making arrangements should contact David Reininger or Julia Morelli
at the Capitol Connection ((703) 993-3100) for information about this
service as soon as possible or visit the Capitol Connection Web site at
http://www.capitolconnection.org and click on ``FERC.''

    FERC conferences are accessible under section 508 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations please
send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll free<PHONE_NUMBER>
(voice) or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY), or send a FAX to<PHONE_NUMBER> with the
required accommodations.
    For more information about the conference, please contact either
Patrick Clarey at<PHONE_NUMBER> or at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or Eli
Massey at<PHONE_NUMBER> or at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-6163 Filed 4-24-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 106 (Friday, June 2, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36303-36304]
[FR Doc No: 2023-11762]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2146-273]

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

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Application Type: Non-Capacity Amendment of License.
    b. Project No: P-2146-273.
    c. Date Filed: May 12, 2023.
    d. Applicant: Alabama Power Company (Alabama Power).
    e. Name of Project: Coosa River Project.
    f. Location: The project is located on the Coosa River, in Coosa,
Chilton, Talladega and Shelby counties, Alabama.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791a-825r.
    h. Applicant Contact: Alan L. Peeples, Alabama Power Company, 600
North 18th Street, P.O. Box 2641, Birmingham, AL 35291-8180, (205) 257-
1401.
    i. FERC Contact: Zeena Aljibury,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].
    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and protests
is 30 days from the issuance date of this notice by the Commission.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
motions to intervene, protests, comments, or recommendations using the
Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000
characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system at
http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your
name and contact information at the end of your comments. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
[email protected],<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, you may submit a paper copy.
Submissions sent via the U.S. Postal Service must be addressed to:
Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street NE, Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426. Submissions sent via
any other carrier must be addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville,
Maryland 20852. The first page of any filing should include the docket
number P-2146-273. Comments emailed to Commission staff are not
considered part of the Commission record.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all
intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of
that document on each person whose name appears on the official service
list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or
documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that
may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they
must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency.
    k. Description of Request: Alabama Power requests approval to
modify Unit 3 at the Lay Development to address significant maintenance
needs and to improve power and efficiency. The proposed scope of work
for Unit 3 includes complete turbine replacement, wicket gate
replacement, wicket gate stem bushings installation, turbine, and
generator bearing upgrades, and related component replacement. Alabama
Power states the turbine replacement is not expected to result in an
increase to the total rated capacity or the maximum discharge of the
unit at rated conditions. Alabama Power notes that project operations
will not change, and refurbishment will not include any structural
changes to the project facilities.
    l. Locations of the Application: This filing may be viewed on the
Commission's website at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary''
link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the
docket number field to access the document. You may also register
online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be
notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or
other pending projects. For assistance, call 1-866-208-3676 or email
[email protected], for

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. Agencies may obtain copies of the application
directly from the applicant.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.214, respectively. In determining the appropriate action to take, the
Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only
those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the
Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments,
protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the
specified comment date for the particular application.
    o. Filing and Service of Documents: Any filing must (1) bear in all
capital letters the title ``COMMENTS'', ``PROTEST'', or ``MOTION TO
INTERVENE'' as applicable; (2) set forth in the heading the name of the
applicant and the project number of the application to which the filing
responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone number of the
person commenting, protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise comply
with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All
comments, motions to intervene, or protests must set forth their
evidentiary basis. Any filing made by an intervenor must be accompanied
by proof of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared
by the Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR
385.2010.
    p. The Commission's Office of Public Participation (OPP) supports
meaningful public engagement and participation in Commission
proceedings. OPP can help members of the public, including landowners,
environmental justice communities, Tribal members and others, access
publicly available information and navigate Commission processes. For
public inquiries and assistance with making filings such as
interventions, comments, or requests for rehearing, the public is
encouraged to contact OPP at<PHONE_NUMBER> or [email protected].

    Dated: May 26, 2023.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-11762 Filed 6-1-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 231 (Friday, December 2, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 74050-74052]
[FR Doc No: 2022-26145]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2022-1464; Airspace Docket No. 22-AGL-34]
RIN 2120-AA66

Proposed Amendment of Class E Airspace; Austin, MN

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend the Class E airspace at Austin,
MN. The FAA is proposing this action due to an airspace review
conducted as part of the decommissioning of the Austin very high
frequency (VHF) omnidirectional range (VOR)/distance measuring
equipment (DME). The

geographic coordinates of the airport would also be updated to coincide
with the FAA's aeronautical database.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 17, 2023.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590; telephone
(202) 366-9826, or<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify FAA Docket No.
FAA-2022-1464/Airspace Docket No. 22-AGL-34 at the beginning of your
comments. You may also submit comments through the internet at
www.regulations.gov. You may review the public docket containing the
proposal, any comments received, and any final disposition in person in
the Dockets Office between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except federal holidays.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11G, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points,
and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the
Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Claypool, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Central Service Center, 10101
Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as
they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
Communications should identify both docket numbers and be submitted in
triplicate to the address listed above. Commenters wishing the FAA to
acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with
those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the
following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket No. FAA-2022-1464/
Airspace Docket No. 22-AGL-34.'' The postcard will be date/time stamped
and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received before the specified closing date for
comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule.
The proposal contained in this notice may be changed in light of the
comments received. A report summarizing each substantive public contact
with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
internet at www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's web page at
www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see the ADDRESSES section for the address and phone number)
between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal
holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal
business hours at the Federal Aviation Administration, Air Traffic
Organization, Central Service Center, Operations Support Group, 10101
Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document proposes to amend FAA Order JO 7400.11G, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 19, 2022, and effective
September 15, 2022. FAA Order JO 7400.11G is publicly available as
listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order JO 7400.11G
lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service
routes, and reporting points.

The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to 14 CFR part 71 by amending the
Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface to
within a 7.3-mile (increased from a 6.3-mile) radius of Austin
Municipal Airport, Austin, MN; removing the Austin VOR/DME and the
associated extension from the airspace legal description; and updating
the geographic coordinates of the airport to coincide with the FAA's
aeronautical database.
    This action is due to an airspace review conducted as part of the
decommissioning of the Austin VOR/DME which provided navigation
information for the instrument procedures at this airport.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order JO 7400.11G, dated August 19, 2022, and effective September
15, 2022, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class
E airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in FAA Order JO 7400.11.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points,
is published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

Environmental Review

    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F,

``Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures'' prior to any FAA
final regulatory action.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the Federal
Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

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

0
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as
follows:

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order JO
7400.11G, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 19,
2022, and effective September 15, 2022, is amended as follows:

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

* * * * *

AGL MN E5 Austin, MN [Amended]

Austin Municipal Airport, MN
    (Lat. 43[deg]39'46'' N, long. 92[deg]55'59'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 7.3-mile radius of the Austin Municipal Airport.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on November 28, 2022.
Steven T. Phillips,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2022-26145 Filed 12-1-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: August 28, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 168)]
[Notices]
[Page 50826-50827]
[DOCID:fr28au08-78]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket Nos. FDA-2008-M-0084, FDA-2008-M-0100 (formerly 2008M-0013),
FDA-2008-M-0182, FDA-2008-M-0109, FDA-2008-M-0207]

Medical Devices; Availability of Safety and Effectiveness
Summaries for Premarket Approval Applications

AGENCY:  Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION:  Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is publishing a list of
premarket approval applications (PMAs) that have been approved. This
list is intended to inform the public of the availability of safety and
effectiveness summaries of approved PMAs through the Internet and the
agency's Division of Dockets Management.

ADDRESSES: Submit written requests for copies of summaries of safety
and effectiveness data to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305),
Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville,
MD 20852. Please cite the appropriate docket number as listed in Table
1 of this document when submitting a written request. See the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for electronic access to the
summaries of safety and effectiveness.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Samie Allen, Center for Devices and
Radiological Health (HFZ-402), Food and Drug Administration, 9200
Corporate Blvd., Rockville, MD 20850,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    In the Federal Register of January 30, 1998 (63 FR 4571), FDA
published a final rule that revised 21 CFR 814.44(d) and 814.45(d) to
discontinue individual publication of PMA approvals and denials in the
Federal Register. Instead, the agency now posts this information on the
Internet on FDA's home page at http://www.fda.gov. FDA believes that
this procedure expedites public notification of these actions because
announcements can be placed on the Internet more quickly than they can
be published in the Federal Register, and FDA believes that the
Internet is accessible to more people than the Federal Register.
    In accordance with section 515(d)(4) and (e)(2) of the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the act) (21 U.S.C. 360e(d)(4) and
(e)(2)), notification of an order approving, denying, or withdrawing
approval of a PMA will continue to include a notice of opportunity to
request review of the order under section 515(g) of the act. The 30-day
period for requesting reconsideration of an FDA action under Sec.
10.33(b) (21 CFR 10.33(b)) for notices announcing approval of a PMA
begins on the day the notice is placed on the Internet. Section
10.33(b) provides that FDA may, for good cause, extend this 30-day
period. Reconsideration of a denial or withdrawal of approval of a PMA
may be sought only by the applicant; in these cases, the 30-day period
will begin when the applicant is notified by FDA in writing of its
decision.
    The regulations provide that FDA publish a quarterly list of
available safety and effectiveness summaries of PMA approvals and
denials that were announced during that quarter. The following is a
list of approved PMAs for which summaries of safety and effectiveness
were placed on the Internet from January 1, 2008, through March 31,
2008. There were no denial actions during this period. The list
provides the manufacturer's name, the product's generic name or the
trade name, and the approval date.

 Table 1.--List of Safety and Effectiveness Summaries for Approved PMAs
       Made Available From January 1, 2008, through March 31, 2008
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 PMA No.  Docket                                              Approval
       No.           Applicant           TRADE NAME             Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
P040021 (S004)    St. Jude        SJM EPIC VALVE AND SJM    November 15,
FDA-2008-M-0084    Medical, Inc.   SUPRA VALVE               2007
------------------------------------------------------------------------

P070001           Synthes Spine,  PRODISC-C TOTAL DISC      December 17,
FDA-2008-M-0100    Inc.            PEPLACEMENT               2007
 (formerly 2008M-
 0013)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
P050045           Dako Denmark a/ DAKO TOP2A FISH PHARM DX  January 11,
FDA-2008-M-0182    s               KIT                       2008
------------------------------------------------------------------------
P060033           Medtronic       ENDEAVOR ZOTAROLIMUS-     February 1,
FDA-2008-M-0109    Vascular        ELUTING CORONARY STENT    2008
                                   ON THE OVER THE WIRE
                                   (OTW), RAPID EXCHANGE
                                   (RX), OR MULTI-EXHANGE
                                   II (MX\2\) STENT
                                   DELIVERY SYSTEM
------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the Internet may obtain the documents at
http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/pmapage.html.

    Dated: August 14, 2008.
Daniel G. Schultz,
Director, Center for Devices and Radiological Health.
[FR Doc. E8-19907 Filed 8-27-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160-01-S


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 172 (Tuesday, September 6, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 61230]
[FR Doc No: 2016-21261]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4277-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2016-0001]

Louisiana; Amendment No. 3 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 Louisiana (FEMA-4277-DR), dated August 14, 2016, and
related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: August 16, 2016.

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 Louisiana is hereby amended to include the following
areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by
the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration
of August 14, 2016.

    Avoyelles, Evangeline, Iberville, Jefferson Davis, St. Martin,
St. Tammany, Washington, and West Feliciana Parishes for Individual
Assistance.
    Avoyelles, Evangeline, Iberville, Jefferson Davis, St. Martin,
St. Tammany, Washington, and West Feliciana Parishes 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.

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2016-21261 Filed 9-2-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register: September 17, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 180)]
[Notices]
[Page 57051]
[DOCID:fr17se10-118]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-1932-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2010-0002]

Kansas; Amendment No. 2 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 Kansas (FEMA-1932-DR), dated August 10, 2010, and
related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: September 7, 2010.

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

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

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

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2010-23332 Filed 9-16-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P