[Federal Register: December 29, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 248)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 68746-68747]
[DOCID:fr29de09-31]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2009-1149; Airspace Docket No. 09-AGL-33]

Proposed Amendment of Class E Airspace; West Bend, WI

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend Class E airspace at West Bend,
WI. Additional controlled airspace is necessary to accommodate new
Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) at West Bend Municipal
Airport, West Bend, WI. The FAA is taking this action to enhance the
safety and management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations at
the airport.

DATES: 0901 UTC. Comments must be received on or before February 12,
2010.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001. You
must identify the docket number FAA-2009-1149/Airspace Docket No. 09-
AGL-33, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments
through the Internet at http://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 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Office
(telephone 1-800-647-5527), is on the ground floor of the building at
the above address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Enander, Central Service Center,
Operations Support Group, Federal Aviation Administration, Southwest
Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd, Fort Worth, TX 76137; telephone: 817-321-
7716.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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-2009-1149/
Airspace Docket No. 09-AGL-33.'' The postcard will be date/time stamped
and returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRM's

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's Web page at http://
www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/airspace_
amendments/.
    Additionally, any person may obtain a copy of this notice by
submitting a request to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA),
Office of Air Traffic Airspace Management, ATA-400, 800 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Communications must identify both docket numbers for this notice.
Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future NPRM's
should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking<PHONE_NUMBER>, to request
a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

Distribution System, which describes the application procedure.

The Proposal

    This action proposes to amend Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations
(14 CFR), Part 71 by adding additional Class E airspace extending
upward from 700 feet above the surface for SIAPs at West Bend Municipal
Airport, West Bend, WI. Controlled airspace is needed for the safety
and management of IFR operations at the airport.
    Class E airspace areas are published in Paragraph 6005 of FAA Order
7400.9T, dated August 27, 2009, and effective September 15, 2009, which
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace
designation listed in this document would be published subsequently in
the Order.
    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
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, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, 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 add additional controlled airspace at West Bend Municipal
Airport, West Bend, WI.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (Air).

The Proposed Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, 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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order
7400.9T, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, signed August 27,
2009, and effective September 15, 2009, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace areas extending upward from 700
feet or more above the surface of the earth.

* * * * *

AGL WI E5 West Bend, WI [Amended]

West Bend Municipal Airport, WI
    (Lat. 43[deg]25'20'' N., long. 88[deg]07'41'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 7.4-mile radius of West Bend Municipal Airport, and within
2 miles each side of the 239[deg] bearing from the airport extending
from the 7.4-mile radius to 11.4 miles southwest of the airport,
excluding that airspace within the Hartford, WI, Class E airspace
area.
* * * * *

    Issued in Fort Worth, TX, on December 17, 2009.
Richard Farrell,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. E9-30864 Filed 12-28-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: June 27, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 123)]
[Notices]
[Page 36571-36575]
[DOCID:fr27jn06-74]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-54021; File No. SR-CHX-2005-06]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc.;
Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Relating
to the Exchange's Disciplinary Process

June 20, 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 March 7, 2005, the Chicago Stock Exchange, inc. (``CHX'' 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 CHX. On June 2,
2006, the Exchange 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\ Amendment No. 1 revises the proposal to: (i) Clarify the
role of Exchange counsel in both disciplinary and delisting
proceedings by providing that Exchange counsel--who are not part of
the CHX's Market Regulation Department--can serve as counsel for the
Hearing Officer, so long as these attorneys have not directly
participated in any examination, investigation or decision
associated with the initiation or conduct of the particular
proceeding; (ii) delete proposed changes to the Exchange's Minor
Rule Violation Plan contained in the original filing, which have
been filed separately with the Commission in File No. SR-CHX-2005-
39; (iii) eliminate the proposed addition of new types of violations
to the existing summary procedure for handling minor infractions;
(iv) clarity that any person against whom a fine is imposed for
minor infractions pursuant to CHX Art. XII, Rule 2(a) will be
provided with notice of the violation and fines imposed; (v) provide
dual authority to the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Regulatory
Officer to impose restrictions on Participant Firm operations for
failure to meet the requirements of CHX Art. XI, rule 3, ``Net
Capital and Aggregate Indebtedness;'' (vi) modify the Exchange's
delisting rule, CHX Art. XXVIII, Rule 4, to make the hearing and
appeal process for delisting decisions similar to the hearings that
might be held in other matters and to provide that the initial
delisting decision-makers are not the same persons who would hear an
appeal from that decision; and (vii) incorporate additional details
that had not been included in the original version of the proposal,
but which have been added to respond to comments from Commission
staff. Amendment No. 1 replaces and supersedes the original filing
in its entirety.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The CHX proposes to adopt, amend, and delete a number of rules
relating to the Exchange's enforcement and disciplinary processes. This
proposal, as amended, would: (1) Modify the procedures by which formal
disciplinary actions and certain other matters that require a hearing
are instituted by removing the Chief Executive Officer (``CEO'') from
the authorization process and substituting the Exchange's Chief
Regulatory Officer (``CRO''); (2) adopt a rule establishing the
criteria by which Hearing Officers are selected and providing a
procedure by which a respondent may move to replace a Hearing Officer
based upon a showing of bias or conflict of interest; (3) delete the
requirement that the CEO approve, modify, or reject the findings of a
Hearing Officer in a formal disciplinary action and certain other
matters that require a hearing; (4) modify the existing rules relating
to appeals of Hearing Officer decisions to permit the Exchange to
appeal an adverse decision; (5) amend the Exchange's rules relating to
the non-payment of fines to provide for additional sanctions; and (6)
make various language and organizational changes. The text of this
proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site http://www.chx.com/rules/proposed_rules.htm
 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 CHX 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 CHX 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
    In light of the Commission's recent guidance that a self-regulatory
organization (``SRO'') should ensure that its ``regulatory function is
strong, vigorous, and sufficiently independent and insulated from
improper influence from management or any regulatory entity,'' \4\ the
CHX has reviewed its existing rules relating to its disciplinary

process.\5\ The Exchange is proposing a number of modifications,
addition and deletions to the rules governing Exchange disciplinary
proceedings. In general, these changes serve to eliminate any
appearance of a conflict of interest by removing the CEO from the
authorization and determination of disciplinary charges. The Exchange
also proposes to enhance the ability of its regulatory staff to
effectively prosecute disciplinary actions by endowing the Exchange
with the right to appeal adverse decisions and providing for addition
sanctions for the failure of an Exchange Participant to promptly pay a
disciplinary fine. The Exchange is also proposing various language and
organizational changes to the disciplinary rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 48946 (December 17,
2003), 68 FR 74678 (December 24, 2003) (order approving File No. SR-
NYSE-2003-34) (the `` NYSE Governance Order'').
    \5\ The CHX's review also is being conducted pursuant to the
requirements of the Commission's September 30, 2003 Order
Instituting Proceedings against the Exchange. Securities Exchange
Act Release No. 48566 (September 30, 2003), Administrative
Proceeding File No. 3-11282 (the ``Order''). Certain aspects of this
filing are also based upon the recommendations of the Independent
Consultant appointed by the terms of the Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

a. Authorization of Formal Disciplinary Actions
    The Exchange's current rules require that the CEO authorize the
institution of all major disciplinary actions.\6\ The Exchange believes
that this requirement is outdated and somewhat inconsistent with recent
Commission direction that SROs must possess ``sufficient independence
in the regulatory process to prevail against undue interference or
influence from the persons or entities being regulated.'' \7\ The CHX
is of the belief, confirmed by the Independent Consultant appointed by
the terms of the Order,\8\ that there is no evidence of any actual
conflict of interest having influenced the decision of the Exchange's
CEO regarding any disciplinary matters. Nevertheless, the Exchange
proposes to remove the CEO from such decision-making processes to
address any negative public perception of a possible conflict of
interest. In place of the current structure, the Exchange proposes that
disciplinary and related proceedings against Exchange Participants be
authorized by the Exchange's CRO. In the case of proceedings based upon
a Participant's failure to maintain operational capability under CHX
Art. XI, Rule 8, the Exchange has determined to permit the institution
of such proceedings at the direction of either the CEO or the CRO.\9\
The Exchange believes that dual authority is appropriate in such
proceedings since, unlike traditional disciplinary matters, they can
involve a mixture of business and regulatory concerns.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ These proceedings include: CHX Art. VII, Rule 2, ``Emergency
Suspensions;'' CHX Art. XI, Rule 3(d), ``Restrictions on
Operations;'' CHX Art. XI, Rule 8, ``Operational Capability;'' CHX
Art. XII, Rule 1(b), ``Disciplinary Actions;'' CHX Art. XII, Rule 2,
``Summary Procedure;'' CHX Art. XXVIII, Rule 4, Interpretation .01,
``Removal of Securities;'' CHX Art. XXX, Rule 8, ``Termination of
Specialist Registration;'' CHX Art. XXXI, Rule 14, ``Termination of
Specialist Registration;'' CHX Art. XXXIV, Rule 15, ``Suspension of
Registered Market Makers.'' Authorization by the CEO is not required
to institute an action pursuant to the Exchanges's Minor Rule
Violation Plan. Such actions are authorized by a Minor Rule
Violation panel, which is appointed by the CEO. See CHX Art. XII,
Rule 9, `` Minor Rule Violations.'' The Exchange proposes to delete
the procedures of CHX Articles XXX, XXXI and XXXIV regarding ex
parte suspension of Participants since the process is both outdated
and duplicative of the Emergency Suspension process detailed in CHX
Art. VII, Rule 2, which is being updated in this filing.
    \7\ NYSE Governance Order, supra note 4.
    \8\ See Order, supra note 5.
    \9\ The Exchange proposes to extend this same dual authority to
the decision to impose restrictions on Participant Firm operations
under CHX Art. XI Rule 3(d), relating to net capital and aggregate
indebtedness requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Vesting the authority to initiate disciplinary actions in the
Exchange's CRO serves to bolster the apparent and actual independence
of the Exchange's regulatory processes. The CRO's primary mission is to
ensure that the Exchange has an effective regulatory program reasonably
designed to ensure compliance by is Participants with the Exchange's
rules and the federal securities laws. The Exchange acknowledges that
the CRO reports to the CEO and therefore could conceivably be
influenced by the latter's views on a proposed disciplinary matter.
However, the CRO is required to appear before, and report on the
Exchange's regulatory programs not less than quarterly to, the
Exchange's Regulatory Oversight Committee, a committee of the CHX's
Board of Directors (``Board'') predominately composed of independent
directors, which is charged with oversight of the Exchange's regulatory
function.\10\ The Exchange believes that this review by the Regulatory
Oversight Committee serves as a reasonable mechanism to prevent any
conflict of interest from interfering with the Exchange's regulatory
role. Moreover, the Exchange notes that the Commission has acknowledged
that there is no``one size fits all'' model for discharging an SRO's
oversight function.\11\ The Exchange believes that this proposed
structure is appropriate given the scope and nature of its regulatory
unit and mission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The composition requirements and responsibilities of the
Exchange's Regulatory Oversight Committee were set forth in the
Order. See Order, supra note 5.
    \11\ See NYSE Governance Order, supa note 4, at n. 96 and
accompanying text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the Exchange proposes to delete paragraph (b) of CHX
Art. XII, Rule 2 to eliminate the ``summary hearing'' process noted
therein and to delete paragraph (c) regarding the ``settlement
procedure.'' To the extent that action under CHX Art. XII, Rule 2(a),
`` Minor Infraction,'' is not warranted under the circumstances
involved, the CRO may refer the matter for a formal disciplinary action
under CHX Art. XII, Rule 1, ``Investigation and Written Report of
Investigation Findings.'' Thus, the current hearing procedure noted in
CHX Art. XII, Rule 2(b) is redundant and unnecessary. The CHX also
proposes to delete the suspension and termination rules applicable to
specialists, odd-lot dealers, and market makers in CHX Articles XXX,
XXXI, and XXXIV, respectively, as obsolete and redundant of the
Emergency Suspension provisions under CHX Art. VII, Rule 2. Finally,
the Exchange also proposes to amend the process under current CHX Art.
XII, Rule 2(d), ``Collateral Proceedings,'' to provide for the
appointment of a Hearing Officer to oversee proceedings to suspend or
bar a Participant or associated person based upon the imposition of a
comparable sanction by another SRO.\12\ The current version of the rule
provides for the CEO to conduct that hearing personally.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Current CHX Art. XII, Rule 2(d) would become proposed CHX
Art. XII, Rule 2(b) because of the proposed deletion of other rule
provisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. Criteria for the Section of Hearing Officers
    The Exchange seeks to amend its disciplinary rules to provide for
criteria to be followed in the selection and appointment of Hearing
Officers in disciplinary proceedings. Currently, the rules of the
Exchange provide only that the CEO shall select a Hearing Officer.\13\
While the Exchange continues to believe that it is appropriate for the
CEO to select the Hearing Officer, the Exchange would like to create
requirements of professional competence and experience and the absence
of bias or any conflict of interest that the CEO would be required to
consider in selecting a Hearing Officer.\14\ In fairness to the

respondent, the Exchange also proposes to create a process by which the
respondent could object to a particular Hearing Officer on the grounds
of bias or conflict of interest.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See CHX Art. XII, Rule 5(a), ``Conduct of Hearing.''
    \14\ See proposed CHX Art. XII, Rule 5(e), ``Appointment of
Hearing Officer.'' These provisions would require that the CEO give
reasonable consideration to the prospective Hearing Officer's
professional competence and reputation, experience in the securities
industry, familiarity with the subject matter involved, the absence
of bias and any actual or perceived conflict of interest and any
other relevant factors.
    \15\ See proposed CHX Art. XII, Rule 5(h), ``Impartiality of
Hearing Officer.'' Any motion seeking the disqualification of the
Hearing Officer would need to be filed within 15 days of the Hearing
Officer's appointment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

c. Initial Decision by Hearing Officers
    CHX rules currently require that the proposed decision of a Hearing
Officer be reviewed by the CEO of the Exchange.\16\ The CEO may take a
number of different actions with respect to the proposed judgment. The
CEO may approve or modify the proposed decision, remand the matter for
further consideration, or even conduct additional proceedings himself.
The Exchange's review of comparable provisions of the rules of other
SROs has not revealed a similar requirement relating to disciplinary
proceedings. In order to eliminate any appearance of a conflict of
interest, the Exchange proposes to eliminate the requirement that the
CEO review the proposed decision of the Hearing Officer and instead
provide that the Hearing Officer issue a final, albeit appealable,
decision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See CHX Art. XII, Rule 5(b), ``Decision.'' This provision
currently is identified as Rule 5(b), but would be changed to Rule
5(f) because of the proposed addition of other rule provisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

d. Appeal of Disciplinary Proceedings
    Under the current CHX rules, disciplinary orders may only be
appealed by the respondent to the Judiciary Committee of the
Exchange.\17\ According to the CHX, the rules of most other exchanges
and SROs permit appeals to be brought by either party. The Exchange
believes that there may be instances when the Exchange's Market
Regulation staff that prosecuted a particular matter may wish to appeal
an adverse decision. For example, where the staff believes that a
Hearing Officer applied an incorrect standard of law in making his or
her decision, an appeal may be appropriate and desirable. Providing the
staff of the Exchange with the authority to initiate an appellate
review would put the staff in the same position as the respondent, and
therefore appears to increase the fundamental fairness of the
disciplinary process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See CHX Art. XII, Rule 6(a), Judiciary Committee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the Exchange proposes to streamline the appellate
review process for disciplinary actions. Currently, appeals are heard
first by a Judiciary Committee, then by the Executive Committee and
finally, on a discretionary basis, by the Board.\18\ In place of this
three-tiered structure, the Exchange proposes to eliminate appellate
review by the Executive Committee. Appeals would be heard by a
Judiciary Committee and, on a discretionary basis, by the full
Board.\19\ The removal of an unnecessary layer of review should reduce
the time required to reach a final judgment, thus contributing to the
fair and effective enforcement of the Exchange's rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See CHX Art. XII, Rule 6.
    \19\ See proposed CHX Art. XII, Rule 6(a) and (b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

e. Failure to Promptly Pay Fines
    The Exchange has noticed a recent trend that some Minor Rule
Violation Plan (MRVP) fines are not being paid in a timely manner.
Under existing Exchange rules, Participants who fail to pay fines owing
to the Exchange within 60 days of the date such amount became payable
may be suspended, after due notice, until such payment is made.\20\
While a suspension rule may be an effective deterrent in most
circumstances, the Exchange would like the flexibility to assess
additional fines or other sanctions, either in lieu of or in addition
to a suspension, as added inducement to avoiding late payment.
Moreover, the Exchange would like to explicitly include associated
persons of Participants in the text of the rule.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See CHX Art. XIV, Rule 10, ``Failure to Pay Debts.''
Suspension of a Participant for Non-payment operates as a
termination of the Participant's registration with the Exchange.
    \21\ The Exchange believes that it already has the authority to
suspend such persons for nonpayment of fines pursuant to CGX ART.
XII, Rule 8, ``Disciplinary Jurisdiction,'' but proposes to amend
the language of CHX Art. XIV, Rule 10, to provide additional clarity
to its Participants and their associated persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

f. Procedural Changes
    Although the Exchange's current rule set forth the general process
to be followed in the course of a disciplinary proceeding, the rules
contain few details about the time frames within which various tasks
must be accomplished; do not provide for pre-hearing discovery; and do
not set forth certain other details about the disciplinary process.
    The Exchange's proposal would attempt to provide more clarity to
these proceedings. As an initial matter, the proposed rules would set
forth clear time frames in which various events must occur, e.g.,
responding to charges, filing of motions, and issuing of orders.\22\
The proposed rules also would confirm the information that should be
included in certain notices; \23\ create limited rights to prehearing
discovery for all parties to a proceeding; \24\ and set briefing
schedules in various situations.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ For example, in CHX Art. XII, the proposed changes would
require: (i) That a respondent file a written answer to charges
within 30 days from the date of service of the charges (CHX Rule
5(b)); (ii) that the Hearing Officer schedule a hearing within 30
days after the filing of an answer (CHX Rule 5(d)); and (iii) that
the Hearing Officer ordinarily issue an order within 90 days after
the conclusion of a hearing (CHX Rule 5(f)). In CHX Art. XXVIII, the
proposed rule changes similarly would require that the Hearing
Officer schedule a hearing within 30 days after receipt of an
issuer's demand for a hearing, and that the Hearing Officer issue an
order within 90 days after the conclusion of a hearing (CHX Rule
4(d)).
    \23\ The proposed rules would confirm that, in any action taken
by the Exchange pursuant to the summary procedure set forth in CHX
Art. XII, rule 2(a), the person against whom a fine is imposed shall
be served (as also provided in CHX Art. XII, Rule 1(c)) with a
written statement (the ``Notice of Fines''), signed by the CRO or
his designee, setting forth: (i) The rule(s) or policy(ies) alleged
to have been violated; (ii) the act or omission constituting each
such violation; (iii) the fine imposed for each such violation; (iv)
the date on which such action is taken; and (v) the date on which
such determinination becomes final and such fine becomes due and
payable to the Exchange, or on which such action must be contested.
The Exchange currently provides this notice to persons against whom
a fine is imposed. This new provision would confirm that that
practice should continue.
    \24\ Under the proposed rules, the parties must exchange a list
of witnesses that they plan to call to testify at least 30 days
before the hearing. See proposed CHX Art. XII, Rule 5(c)(1),
``Prehearing Procedure.'' Any party may request production of some
or all of the documents that an opposing party intends to introduce
as evidence. This request must be made at least 45 days prior to the
hearing, and the documents must be produced at least 30 days before
the hearing. See proposed CHX Art, XII, Rule 5(c)(2). Under the
proposed rules, a party that does not identify witnesses or produce
requested documents would be barred from presenting those witnesses
or documents at the hearing, unless the party seeking to introduce
the evidence could show good cause for the failure to earlier
identify the witnesses or documents and could establish that the
failure to allow the presentation of the evidence would result in
undue hardship to that party. See proposed Art, XII, Rules 5(c)(1)
and 5(c)(2).
    \25\ See proposed CHX Art. XII, Rule 5(h) (regarding motions to
disqualify the hearing examiner) and CHX Art. XII, Rule 6(a)
(regarding appeals to the Judiciary Committee).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Somewhat more substantively, the proposed rules would: (i) Confirm
that the Board or the Executive Committee could direct the CRO to
initiate a disciplinary proceeding; \26\ (ii) confirm that a Hearing
Officer must make specific findings as to each proffered charge and
impose an appropriate sanction for violations that are found to have
occurred; \27\ (iii) confirm that the Exchange will serve a party fined
under the summary procedure in CHX Art. XII, Rule 2 with a notice that
provides specific information about the violation and the associated
fine; \28\ (iv) clarify that fines assessed under the summary procedure
of CHX Art. XII, Rule 2 are not publicly reported, except as may be

required by Rule 19d-1 under the Act;\29\ (v) extend the emergency
suspension rules to associated persons of Participants;\30\ and (vi)
confirm that the three-person board panel that hears an appeal from an
emergency suspension decision would consist of at least two public
directors on the Board.\31\ The Exchange also proposes to add
provisions that set forth the required content of settlement agreements
in disciplinary proceedings.\32\ The Exchange believes that these
proposed changes provide important clarifications that are consistent
with the Exchange's obligation to provide a fair and vigorous procedure
for the enforcement of its rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See proposed CHX Art. XII, Rule 1(b)(2).
    \27\ See proposed CHX Art. XII, Rule 5(f).
    \28\ See supra note 23.
    \29\ See proposed CHX Art. XII, Rule 2(a).
    \30\ See proposed CHX Art. VII, Rule 2.
    \31\ See proposed CHX Art. VII, Rule 2(b).
    \32\ See proposed CHX Art. XII, Rule 1(d). This proposed
provision would confirm that a respondent could settle a proceeding
at any time by entering into a settlement agreement with the
Exchange without admitting or denying the charges, except as to
jurisdiction (which must be admitted). Under the proposed rules, a
settlement agreement must contain a waiver by the respondent of all
rights to appeal and a proposed penalty to be imposed, which must be
reasonable under the circumstances and consistent with the
seriousness of the alleged violations. The CRO would have the sole
right to approve a proposed settlement agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

g. Removal of Securities
    Other proposed changes can be found in CHX Art. XXVIII, which
contains the Exchange's rules relating to the listing of securities. In
this article, the Exchange proposes to add text that sets forth new
requirements of professional competence and experience, and the absence
of bias or any conflict of interest, that the CEO would be required to
consider in selecting a Hearing Officer for a proposed delisting
hearing.\33\ The proposal would also incorporate a process by which an
issuer could object to a particular Hearing Officer on the grounds of
bias or conflict of interest.\34\ In addition, the proposed changes in
this article would confirm that a Hearing Officer's decision is final
unless a review is specifically demanded and would set forth the
process and standards that should be followed by the Executive
Committee on any appeal of the Hearing Officer's decision.\35\ Finally,
the proposed changes would make clear that the final decision to delist
a security, on appeal, would be made by the Executive Committee (not by
the Exchange's Board) and would confirm that the initial delisting
decision-makers are not the same persons who would hear an appeal from
that decision.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See proposed CHX Art. XXVIII, Rule 4(d).
    \34\ Id.
    \35\ See proposed CHX Art. XXVIII, Rule 4(d)-(e).
    \36\ The current rule provides that securities may be delisted
by the Exchange's Board and that an appeal from that decision is
made to a hearing examiner and, ultimately, to the Exchange's
Executive Committee. See CHX Art. XXVIII, Rule 4 and Interpretation
and Policy .01. The Exchange believes that it is appropriate to
remove any suggestion that the same persons who make a delisting
decision might hear the appeal from that decision. Under the
proposed change, the Exchange's staff would make an initial
delisting determination, which could be heard by a hearing examiner
and then appealed to the Exchange's Executive Committee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

h. Other Changes
    The Exchange has made a number of other miscellaneous changes to
its disciplinary rules in an effort to modernize the terms used in
referring to the parties to proceedings. Some of the terminology
changes include substituting ``respondent'' for ``accused'' and
substituting ``hearing'' for ``trial.'' \37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ See, e.g., proposed CHX Art. XII, Rule 1(b) (introducing
the term ``respondent'') and CHX Art. XII, Rule 5 (introducing the
term ``hearing'' instead of ``trial'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange anticipates that these proposed rule changes, if and
when approved by the Commission, would be implemented for any newly-
commenced proceeding as soon as possible after such Commission approval
occurs. Upon approval of the proposed rule changes, the Exchange will
issue a notice to its Participants that describes the changes and that
confirms that the changes will apply to any proceeding that is
initiated by the Exchange on or after a date that immediately follows
the date of the Commission's approval.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ These changes would apply to the appeal of any MRVP fine
that is imposed on or after the approval date, as well as to any
formal disciplinary proceeding, suspension decision or delisting
action that the Exchange initiates on or after the approval date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The CHX believes the proposal 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).\39\ The CHX believes the proposal is
consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \40\ in that it is designed
to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove
impediments to, and to perfect the mechanism of, a free and open market
and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and
the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \40\ 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 changes will
impose any burden on competition.

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 Exchange 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, 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-CHX-2005-06 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CHX-2005-06. 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 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 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; 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-CHX-2005-06 and should be
submitted on or before July 18, 2006.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\41\
J. Lynn Taylor,
Assistant Secretary
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 06-5682 Filed 6-26-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-M


(12) A statement of the proposed statistical methods to be used.
    (b) For studies that include the use of animals, a committee whose
function is to ensure that the care and use of animals is appropriate
and humane must review and approve the study before initiation of the
study and approval must be documented.
    (c) A statement that the study must be conducted in compliance with
the provisions of this part, to be signed and dated by the study
sponsor and testing facility management with executive responsibility,
must be appended to the protocol.
    (d) All changes in or revisions of an approved protocol and the
reasons for the changes must be documented. These amendments to the
protocol must be signed and dated by the study sponsor and the study
director. For multisite studies, these amendments must also be signed
and dated by all independent contributing scientists, principal
investigators, and any other person conducting a phase of the
nonclinical laboratory study affected by the amendment. Signed and
dated amendments must be maintained with the protocol.
    (e) A committee whose function is to ensure that the care and use
of animals in studies is appropriate and humane must review and approve
any protocol changes that would impact animal welfare before
implementation and approval must be documented.
0
29. Revise Sec.  58.130 to read as follows:

Sec.  58.130  Conduct of a nonclinical laboratory study.

    (a) The analytical methods used for all phases of a nonclinical
laboratory study must be demonstrated to be accurate and of sufficient
sensitivity to measure, with appropriate precision, the analytes in
question.
    (b) Test, control, and reference article characterization testing
must be conducted as described in subpart F of this part.
    (c) Humane care and ethical treatment of test animals must be
considered in advance and upheld in conjunction with achieving study
objectives. The attending veterinarian must be included in
consultations regarding the impact of a given protocol on the welfare
of test animals, in particular the recognition and alleviation of
species-specific pain or distress and methods of euthanasia. The
attending veterinarian must be deferred to when decisions regarding
animal welfare arise, particularly when animals are in pain or
distress.
    (d) The nonclinical laboratory study must be conducted according to
the protocol. The person responsible for a given phase of a nonclinical
laboratory study must sign and date the protocol, as required in Sec.
58.120(a)(11), before initiation of that phase of the study.
    (e) Any change to the protocol must be approved as an amendment, as
required in Sec.  58.120(d), before implementation.
    (f) The test systems must be monitored in conformity with the
protocol.
    (g) Specimens must be identified by test system, study, nature, and
date of collection. This information must be located on the specimen
container or must accompany the specimen in a manner that precludes
error in the recording and storage of data.
    (h) Records of gross findings for a specimen from post mortem
observations must be available to a pathologist when examining that
specimen histopathologically, unless specified otherwise in the study
protocol.
0
30. Add Sec.  58.180 to subpart J to read as follows:

Sec.  58.180  Data quality and integrity.

    (a) All data generated during the conduct of a nonclinical
laboratory study must be accurate, legible, contemporaneous, original,
and attributable (ALCOA). Also, data must be credible, internally
consistent, and corroborated.
    (b) All data must be recorded indelibly, directly, and promptly to
a permanent medium at the time of observation and must identify
unambiguously the person entering the data. Any change to any entry
must be made so as not to obscure the original entry, must indicate the
reason for such

change, must indicate when the change was made, and must identify who
made the change. When data are either captured or maintained, or both
captured and maintained electronically, these requirements are
fulfilled by the use of an electronic records system fully compliant
with applicable regulations.
    (c) All data accrued as required in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this
section must be included in the final study report.
0
31. Revise Sec.  58.185 to read as follows:

Sec.  58.185  Reporting of nonclinical laboratory study results.

    (a) A final study report must be prepared for each nonclinical
laboratory study and must include the following:
    (1) Name and address of the testing facility and the dates on which
the study was initiated and completed. For multisite studies,
additionally the name and address of any person conducting a phase of
the nonclinical laboratory study, including the location of all
independent contributing scientists.
    (2) Names of the attending veterinarians for all phases of the
nonclinical laboratory study that included the use of animals.
    (3) Objectives and procedures stated in the approved protocol,
including any changes in the original protocol.
    (4) Statistical methods employed for analyzing the data.
    (5) Test, control, and reference articles identified by:
    (i) Name;
    (ii) Chemical Abstract Service (CAS) number or code number, where
such identification exists;
    (iii) Strength, purity, and composition or other appropriate
characteristics, and for tobacco products as described in Sec.
58.105(a);
    (iv) The name and address of the manufacturer(s); and
    (v) The name and address of the person(s) conducting the testing to
define their characteristics, as applicable.
    (6) Stability of test, control, and reference articles under the
conditions of administration, including the name and address of the
person(s) conducting the testing.
    (7) A description of the methods used, including methods for the
control of bias in the conduct of the study and the analysis and
reporting of test results.
    (8) A description of the test system used. Where applicable, the
final study report must include the number of animals used, sex, body
weight range, source of supply, species, strain and substrain, age, and
procedure used for identification.
    (9) A description of the dosage, dosage regimen, route of
administration, and duration, including the results of testing
conducted to determine the concentration, uniformity, and stability of
mixtures of articles with carriers, as applicable, and the name and
address of the person conducting the testing.
    (10) A description of all circumstances that may have affected the
quality or integrity of the data, including those documented by the
study director as described in Sec.  58.33(b)(9) and all health-related
issues reported by an attending veterinarian or appropriately
designated personnel during the course of the study as described in
Sec.  58.90(b) and (c).
    (11) The name and affiliation of the study director, the names of
all contributing scientists, principal investigators, and other
professionals, the sponsor, and all supervisory personnel who were
involved in the study or in the preparation or review of the final
study report.
    (12) A description of the transformations, calculations, or
operations performed on the data, a summary and analysis of the data,
and a statement of the conclusions drawn from the analysis.
    (13) The original, and any amended, signed and dated reports of
each of the contributing scientists, principal investigators, or any
other person involved in the study, including each person who conducted
an analysis or evaluation of data or specimens from the study after
data generation was completed. These reports must contain all data
generated.
    (14) The locations where all specimens, reserve samples, raw data,
and the final study report are to be stored.
    (15) The statement prepared and signed by the responsible QAU as
described in Sec.  58.35(b)(11).
    (16) A statement by the study director of the study's extent of
compliance with this part, including a discussion of any study
deviations found to impact the integrity of the study as described in
Sec.  58.185(a)(10).
    (b) The final report must be signed and dated by the study
director.
    (c) Corrections or additions to a final report must be in the form
of an amendment by the study director. The amendment must clearly
identify that part of the final report that is being added to or
corrected and the reasons for the correction or addition, and must be
signed and dated by the person responsible.
    (d) If for any reason a study is discontinued before completion,
the study director must write, sign, and date a short summary report
closing the study. This report must discuss the reasons for closure and
must be archived, along with all study material, as described in Sec.
58.190.
0
32. Revise Sec.  58.190 to read as follows:

Sec.  58.190  Storage and retrieval of records and data.

    (a) All raw data, documentation, protocols, final reports, reserve
samples, and specimens (except those specimens obtained from
mutagenicity tests and wet specimens of blood, urine, feces, and
biological fluids) generated as a result of a nonclinical laboratory
study must be retained. Correspondence and other documents relating to
interpretation and evaluation of data, other than those documents
contained in the final study report, must also be retained.
    (b) There must be archives for orderly storage and expedient
retrieval of all raw data, documentation, protocols, specimens, and
interim and final reports. Conditions of storage must minimize
deterioration of the documents or specimens in accordance with the
requirements for the time period of their retention and the nature of
the documents or specimens. A testing facility may contract with
commercial archives to provide a repository for all material to be
retained. Raw data and specimens may be retained elsewhere provided
that the archives have specific reference to those other locations.
    (c) Material retained or referred to in the archives must be
indexed to permit expedient retrieval.
    (d) All study material described in paragraph (a) of this section
must be archived no later than 2 weeks after the study completion date
(as defined in Sec.  58.3).
    (e) If a sponsor delays completion of the final study report, the
study director must complete, sign, and date the final study report and
archive all study material no later than 6 months after completion of
the last draft of the final study report.
    (f) If a study sponsor halts a nonclinical laboratory study before
all protocol-required testing is completed, a decision that the study
is discontinued must be made no later than 6 months after the study was
stopped. Once the study has been determined to be discontinued, the
study director must prepare a summary report, as required by Sec.
58.185(d). The summary report and all study material must be archived
no later than 2 weeks after the study director signs the summary
report.
    (g) An individual must be identified as responsible for the
archives. Archiving specifications for multisite

studies must also be included in the approved study protocol.
    (h) Only authorized personnel can have access to the archives.
    (i) SOPs regarding archiving, required in Sec.  58.81(b)(13), must
include specific procedures for removal of study materials from the
archives, including maximum timeframes material can remain outside of
the archives.
0
33. Revise Sec.  58.195 to read as follows:

Sec.  58.195  Retention of records.

    (a) Record retention requirements set forth in this section do not
supersede the record retention requirements of any other regulations in
this chapter nor do they supersede any other legal requirements
elsewhere in applicable statutes or regulations.
    (b) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, all raw
data, documentation, protocols, final study reports, reserve samples,
and specimens pertaining to a nonclinical laboratory study and required
to be made by this part must be retained in the archive(s) for
whichever of the following periods is shortest:
    (1) A period of at least 2 years following the date on which an
application or submission to FDA, in support of which the results of
the nonclinical laboratory study were submitted, is approved or cleared
by FDA, a premarket authorization is issued, or the application or
submission is administratively closed. This requirement does not apply
to studies supporting investigational new drug applications (INDs) or
applications for investigational device exemptions (IDEs), records of
which are governed by the provisions of paragraph (b)(2) of this
section.
    (2) A period of at least 5 years following the date on which the
results of the nonclinical laboratory study are submitted to FDA in
support of an application or submission.
    (3) In other situations (e.g., where the nonclinical laboratory
study does not result in the submission of the study in support of an
application or submission to FDA), a period of at least 2 years
following the study completion date or the date on which the study is
terminated or discontinued.
    (c) Wet specimens (except those specimens obtained from
mutagenicity tests and wet specimens of blood, urine, feces, and
biological fluids), samples of test, control, and reference articles,
and specially prepared material, which are relatively fragile and
differ markedly in stability and quality during storage, must be
retained only as long as the quality of the preparation affords
evaluation. In no case is retention required for longer periods than
those set forth in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section.
    (d) Management with executive responsibility must ensure
maintenance of the master schedule and copies of study protocols, as
specified in SOPs as described in Sec.  58.81(b)(13) and as specified
in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section. QAUs must maintain records
of QAU inspections, as required by Sec.  58.35(c) for the period of
time specified in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section.
    (e) Summaries of training and experience and job descriptions
required to be maintained by Sec.  58.29(d) may be retained along with
all other employment records for the length of time specified in
paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section.
    (f) Records and reports of the maintenance and calibration and
inspection of equipment, as required by Sec.  58.63(b) and (c), must be
retained for the length of time specified in paragraph (b) of this
section.
    (g) Records required by this part may be retained either as
original records or as true copies that maintain the original intent
and meaning and are made according to the person's SOPs as described in
Sec.  58.81(b)(22).
    (h) If a facility conducting nonclinical laboratory testing goes
out of business or for any reason can no longer serve as the archive
site for a particular study, all raw data, documentation, and other
material specified in this section must be transferred to the archives
of the sponsor of the study or to another appropriate archive facility.
The facility must notify FDA in writing (and the study sponsor if not
the recipient of the study material) of the transfer no later than 10
working days after the transfer occurs.
    (i) A copy of the notification of change of archive site, as
required by paragraph (h) of this section, can serve as the amendment
to the final study report required in Sec.  58.185(c) when appended to
that report.
0
34. Revise the heading of subpart K to read as follows:

Subpart K--Disqualification of Any Person Conducting a Phase of a
Nonclinical Laboratory Study

0
35. Revise Sec.  58.200 to read as follows:

Sec.  58.200  Purpose.

    (a) The purposes of disqualification are:
    (1) To permit the exclusion from consideration of completed studies
for which a phase was conducted by any person failing to comply with
the requirements of the GLP regulations until it can be adequately
demonstrated that such noncompliance did not occur during, or did not
affect the validity or acceptability of data generated by, a particular
study; and
    (2) To exclude from consideration all studies completed after the
date of disqualification until the disqualified person can satisfy the
Commissioner that it will conduct studies in compliance with such
regulations.
    (b) The determination that a nonclinical laboratory study may not
be considered in support of an application or submission to FDA does
not, however, relieve the applicant of any obligation under any other
applicable regulation to submit the results of the study to FDA.
0
36. Revise Sec.  58.202 to read as follows:

Sec.  58.202  Grounds for disqualification.

    FDA may disqualify any person conducting a phase of a nonclinical
laboratory study upon finding that person repeatedly or deliberately
failed to comply with one or more of the regulations set forth in this
part (or any other regulations regarding such facilities in this
chapter) or repeatedly or deliberately submitted false information in
any required report.
0
37. In Sec.  58.204, revise paragraph (a) to read as follows:

Sec.  58.204  Notice of and opportunity for hearing on proposed
disqualification.

    (a) Whenever FDA has information indicating that grounds exist
under Sec.  58.202, which justifies disqualification of any person
conducting a phase of a nonclinical laboratory study, FDA may issue to
that person a written notice proposing that person be disqualified.
* * * * *
0
38. Revise Sec.  58.206 to read as follows:

Sec.  58.206  Final order on disqualification.

    (a) If the Commissioner, after the regulatory hearing, or after the
time for requesting a hearing expires without a request being made,
upon an evaluation of the administrative record of the disqualification
proceeding, makes the findings required in Sec.  58.202, the
Commissioner issues a final order disqualifying that person. Such order
must include a statement of the basis for that determination. Upon
issuing a final order, the Commissioner notifies (with a copy of the
order) the disqualified person of the action. The notification also
will explain that a person who is disqualified under this part will be
ineligible to receive a test article under part 511 of this chapter. A
clinical investigator ineligible to receive a test article under part
511 of this chapter

will be ineligible to conduct any nonclinical laboratory study intended
to support an application for a research or marketing permit for a new
animal drug.
    (b) If the Commissioner, after a regulatory hearing or after the
time for requesting a hearing expires without a request being made,
upon an evaluation of the administrative record of the disqualification
proceeding, does not make the findings required in Sec.  58.202, the
Commissioner issues a final order terminating the disqualification
proceeding. Such order must include a statement of the basis for that
determination. Upon issuing a final order the Commissioner notifies
that person and provides a copy of the order.
0
39. Revise Sec.  58.210 to read as follows:

Sec.  58.210  Actions upon disqualification.

    (a) Once a person has been disqualified, each application and
submission to FDA containing or relying upon any nonclinical laboratory
study for which a phase was conducted by the disqualified person may be
examined to determine whether such study was or would be essential to a
decision. If it is determined that a study was or would be essential,
FDA must also determine whether the study is acceptable,
notwithstanding the disqualification of that person. Any study for
which a phase was conducted by the disqualified person before
disqualification may be presumed to be unacceptable, and the person
relying on the study may be required to establish that the study was
not affected by the circumstances that led to the disqualification,
e.g., by submitting validating information. If the study is then
determined to be unacceptable, such data will be eliminated from
consideration in support of the application or submission to FDA and
such elimination may serve as new information justifying appropriate
regulatory action.
    (b) No nonclinical laboratory study for which any phase was begun
by a disqualified person after the date of that person's
disqualification can be considered in support of any application or
submission to FDA, unless the disqualified person has been reinstated
under Sec.  58.219. The determination that a study may not be
considered in support of an application or submission to FDA does not,
however, relieve the applicant of any obligation under any other
applicable regulation to submit the results of the study to FDA.
0
40. Revise Sec.  58.213 to read as follows:

Sec.  58.213  Public disclosure of information regarding
disqualification.

    (a) Upon issuance of a final order disqualifying a person under
Sec.  58.206(a), the Commissioner may notify all or any interested
persons. Such notice may be given at the discretion of the Commissioner
whenever the Commissioner believes that such disclosure would further
the public interest or would promote compliance with the GLP
regulations set forth in this part. Such notice, if given, must include
a copy of the final order issued under Sec.  58.206(a) and must state
that the disqualification constitutes a determination by FDA that
nonclinical laboratory studies for which a phase was performed by the
disqualified person will not be considered by FDA in support of any
application or submission to FDA. If such notice is sent to another
Federal Government agency, FDA will recommend that the agency also
consider whether or not it should accept nonclinical laboratory studies
for which a phase was performed by the disqualified person. If such
notice is sent to any other person, it states that it is given because
of the relationship between the disqualified person and the person
being notified and that FDA is not advising or recommending that any
action be taken by the person notified.
    (b) A determination that a person has been disqualified and the
administrative record regarding such determination are disclosable to
the public under part 20 of this chapter.
0
41. Revise Sec.  58.215 to read as follows:

Sec.  58.215  Alternative or additional actions to disqualification.

    (a) Disqualification of any person under this subpart is
independent of, and neither in lieu of nor a precondition to, other
proceedings or actions authorized by the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act. FDA may, at any time, institute against a disqualified
person or against the sponsor of a nonclinical laboratory study that
has been submitted to FDA, or both, any appropriate judicial
proceedings (civil or criminal) and any other appropriate regulatory
action, including civil money penalties, in addition to or in lieu of,
and before, simultaneously with, or subsequent to, disqualification.
FDA may also refer the matter to another Federal, State, or local
government law enforcement or regulatory agency for such action as that
agency deems appropriate.
    (b) FDA may refuse to consider any particular nonclinical
laboratory study in support of an application or submission to FDA, if
it finds that the study was not conducted according to the GLP
regulations set forth in this part, without disqualifying any person
that conducted one or more phases of the study or undertaking other
regulatory action.
0
42. Revise Sec.  58.217 to read as follows:

Sec.  58.217  Suspension or termination of any person conducting a
phase of a nonclinical laboratory study by a sponsor.

    Termination of any person conducting a phase of a nonclinical
laboratory study by a sponsor is independent of, and neither in lieu of
nor a precondition to, proceedings or actions authorized by this
subpart. If a sponsor terminates or suspends any person conducting a
phase of a nonclinical laboratory study from further participation in a
study that is being conducted as part of any application or submission
to FDA that has been submitted to any Center of FDA (whether approved
or cleared, premarket authorization issued, or administratively
closed), the sponsor must notify that Center in writing within 15
working days of the action; the notice must include a statement of the
reasons for such action. Suspension or termination of any person
conducting a phase of a nonclinical laboratory study by a sponsor does
not relieve the sponsor of any obligation under any other applicable
regulation to submit the results of the study to FDA.
0
43. Revise Sec.  58.219 to read as follows:

Sec.  58.219  Reinstatement of a disqualified person.

    Any person that has been disqualified may be reinstated as an
acceptable source of data for a phase of a nonclinical laboratory study
to be submitted to FDA if the Commissioner determines, upon an
evaluation of materials submitted by that person, as well as the
results from an FDA inspection of that person, that procedures are in
place that would allow that person to conduct a phase of future
nonclinical laboratory studies in compliance with the GLP regulations
set forth in this part. As noted in Sec.  58.210(b), no nonclinical
laboratory study for which a phase was begun by a disqualified person
after the date of that person's disqualification is considered in
support of any application or submission to FDA, unless that person has
been reinstated. A disqualified person that wishes to be so reinstated
must present in writing to the Commissioner reasons why it believes it
should be reinstated and a detailed description of the corrective
actions it has taken or intends to take to assure that the acts or
omissions which led to its disqualification will not recur.

The disqualified person must also state its availability for
inspection. If a disqualified person is reinstated, the Commissioner
must so notify that person and all organizations and persons who were
notified, under Sec.  58.213 of the disqualification of that person. A
determination that a disqualified person has been reinstated is
disclosable to the public under part 20 of this chapter.

    Dated: August 16, 2016.
Peter Lurie,
Associate Commissioner for Public Health Strategy and Analysis.
[FR Doc. 2016-19875 Filed 8-23-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 7 (Monday, January 12, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1544-1546]
[FR Doc No: 2015-00220]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-74003; File No. SR-Phlx-2014-79]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Modify
the Rule Governing Modification of Orders on Its NASDAQ OMX PSX
Facility (``PSX'') in the Event of an Issuer Corporate Action Related
to a Dividend, Payment or Distribution

January 6, 2015.
    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 December 23, 2014, NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC (``Phlx'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``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 the
Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://nasdaqomxphlx.cchwallstreet.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 aspects of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    PSX Rule 4761 [sic] \3\ addresses the treatment of quotes/orders in
securities that are the subject of issuer corporate actions related to
a dividend, payment or distribution. The rule applies to any trading
interest that is carried on the PSX book overnight. As a general
matter, PSX cancels open quotes/orders in the event of any corporate
action related to a dividend, payment or distribution, on the ex-date
of the action. The cancellation occurs immediately prior to the opening
of trading at 8 a.m. on the ex-date of the corporate action, and the
member receives a cancellation notice, so that it can, if it desires,
reenter the order at the commencement of trading on the ex-date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Commission notes that the correct rule number for this
reference is PSX Rule 3311.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Prior to 2013, PSX had not had a clear rule providing for the
adjustments of quotes and orders carried on the PSX book overnight. In
April 2013, Phlx adopted Rule 3311 to provide that PSX would cancel all
open quotes/orders in the event of any corporate action.\4\
Subsequently, in response to member demand for assistance with order
management with respect to certain common types of corporate action,
Phlx amended the rule to offer limited, optional functionality to allow
open orders to be adjusted, rather than cancelled.\5\ As written, the
rule provides for the possibility of order adjustment in the case of
cash dividends, forward stock splits, and combined cash dividends/
forward stock splits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 69632 (May 23, 2013), 78
FR 32501 (May 30, 2013) (SR-Phlx-2013-56).
    \5\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 70110 (August 5, 2013),
78 FR 48736 (August 9, 2013) (SR-Phlx-2013-77).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposal will expand the rule also to provide for adjustment in
the case of stock dividends and combined cash dividends/stock
dividends. The proposal reflects the conclusion, based on member
feedback, that actions resulting in the distribution of additional
stock should be treated similarly, regardless of whether they are
denominated as forward stock splits or stock dividends. Phlx will make
members aware of the effective date of the proposed change by the
issuance of a widely disseminated Equity Trader Alert.
    Under the current rule, a member may designate that all orders with
a time-in-

force of good-till-cancelled \6\ that are entered through one or more
order entry ports specified by the member will be processed in the
manner specified below.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Phlx notes that the use of good-till-cancelled orders is not
prevalent, accounting for significantly less than 1% of all orders
entered into PSX. The vast majority of orders expire by their terms
at the end of regular market hours.
    \7\ The member may opt for this processing on a port-by-port
basis. Thus, the provisions providing for order adjustment are
applied to all good-till-cancelled orders entered through a port
that has been specified by the member for such processing. Because
members may obtain multiple ports, however, members may opt to apply
different processing to different orders based on the ports through
which they are entered.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (1) Cash Dividend. If an issuer is paying a cash dividend, the
price of an order to buy is reduced by the amount of the sum of all
dividends payable, rounded up to the nearest whole cent; provided,
however, that there will be no adjustment if the sum of all dividends
is less than $0.01. For example, if the sum of all dividends is $0.381,
the price of the order will be reduced by $0.39. An order to sell will
be retained but will receive no price adjustment.
    (2) Forward Stock Split. If an issuer is implementing a forward
stock split, the order is cancelled if its size is less than one round
lot. If the order's size is greater than one round lot, (i) the size of
the order is multiplied by the ratio of post-split shares to pre-split
shares, with the result rounded downward to the nearest whole share,
and (ii) the price of the order will be multiplied by the ratio of pre-
split shares to post-split shares, with the result rounded down to the
nearest whole penny in the case of orders to buy and rounded up to the
nearest whole penny in the case of orders to sell.
    Under the change proposed in this filing, stock dividends will be
treated in the same manner as forward stock splits. Thus, any corporate
action in which additional shares are issued to holders of outstanding
shares will be treated in the manner described above.
    For example, if a member has entered a good-till-cancelled order to
buy 375 shares at $10.95 per share and the issuer implemented a split
or dividend under which an additional 1.25 shares would be issued for
each share outstanding, the size of the order would be adjusted to 843
shares (375 x 2.25/1 = 843.75, rounded down to 843) and the price of
the order would be adjusted to $4.86 per share ($10.95 per share x 1/
2.25 = $4.8667 per share, rounded down to $4.86 per share). An order to
sell at the same price and size would be adjusted to 843 shares with a
price of $4.87 per share ($4.8667 per share, rounded up).\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Phlx is also amending the example in the rule text to make
it clear that the prices provided therein are per share prices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (3) Combination of Cash Dividend and Forward Stock Split or Stock
Dividend. Under the current rule, if an issuer is implementing a cash
dividend and a forward stock split on the same date, the adjustments
described above will both be applied, in the order described in the
notice of the corporate actions received by Phlx.\9\ Under the proposed
rule change, this provision is being expanded to cover stock dividends
as well as forward stock splits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Phlx receives notice of corporate actions from the listing
exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As is currently the case, changes to open orders will continue to
be effected immediately prior to the opening of the System at 8:00 a.m.
on the ex-date of the applicable corporate action. Open orders that are
retained are re-entered by the System (as adjusted above) immediately
prior to the opening of the System, such that they will retain time
priority over new orders entered at or after 8:00 a.m.\10\ Under the
proposed rule change, for corporate actions other than cash dividends,
forward stock splits, and stock dividends (or any combination thereof),
open orders are always cancelled, regardless of the port through which
they were entered.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ To the extent that multiple good-till-cancelled orders in a
particular security are adjusted and re-entered, such orders may not
retain the same time priority vis-[agrave]-vis one another that they
had on the preceding day. Rather, because such orders are entered
simultaneously through multiple order entry ports, their relative
priority is a function of the duration of system processing
associated with each individual order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    Phlx believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\11\ in general, and with Section
6(b)(5) of the Act \12\ in particular, in that the proposal 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 regulating, clearing, settling,
processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions
in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest. Specifically, Phlx believes
that the change, which is responsive to member input, will facilitate
transactions in securities and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market by providing members with additional optional functionality that
may assist them with order management with respect to stock dividends
in a manner similar to the current functionality with respect to cash
dividends and forward splits. Because forward splits and stock
dividends both involve the distribution of additional stock to current
stockholders, providing them with similar treatment under the rule is
logical and may help to prevent confusion on the part of members that
expect both types of corporate events to receive consistent treatment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Phlx 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. Specifically, by
offering market participants additional options with regard to
management of open orders, the change has the potential to enhance
PSX's competitiveness with respect to other trading venues, thereby
promoting greater competition. Moreover, the change does not burden
competition in that it does not restrict the ability of members to
enter and update trading interest in PSX.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \13\ and
subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(a)(ii).
    \14\ 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: (i) Necessary or
appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the protection of
investors; or (iii) otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the
Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall
institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule should be
approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-Phlx-2014-79 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2014-79. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2014-79, and should be
submitted on or before February 2, 2015.

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

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

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-00220 Filed 1-9-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 148 (Thursday, August 3, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51354-51355]
[FR Doc No: 2023-16565]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2009-0035]

Ethylene Oxide (EtO) Standard Extension of the Office of
Management and Budget's (OMB) Approval of Information Collection
(Paperwork) Requirements

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Request for public comments.

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

SUMMARY: OSHA solicits public comments concerning the proposal to
extend the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) approval of the
information collection requirements specified in the Ethylene Oxide
(EtO) Standard.

DATES: Comments must be submitted (postmarked, sent, or received) by
October 2, 2023.

ADDRESSES:
    Electronically: You may submit comments and attachments
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal. Follow the instructions online for submitting
comments.
    Docket: To read or download comments or other material in the
docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov. Documents in the docket are
listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index; however, some
information (e.g., copyrighted material) is not publicly available to
read or download through the website. All submissions, including
copyrighted material, are available for inspection through the OSHA
Docket Office. Contact the OSHA Docket Office at<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY
(877) 889-5627) for assistance in locating docket submissions.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and OSHA
docket number (OSHA-2009-0035) for the Information Collection Request
(ICR). OSHA will place all comments, including any personal
information, in the public docket, which may be made available online.
Therefore, OSHA cautions interested parties about submitting personal
information such as social security numbers and birthdates.
    For further information on submitting comments, see the ``Public
Participation'' heading in the section of this notice titled
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Seleda Perryman or Theda Kenney,
Directorate of Standards and Guidance, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Department of Labor, as part of the continuing effort to reduce
paperwork and respondent (i.e., employer) burden, conducts a
preclearance consultation program to provide the public with an
opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing information
collection requirements in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This program ensures that
information is in the desired format, reporting burden (time and costs)
is minimal, the collection instruments are clearly understood, and
OSHA's estimate of the information collection burden is accurate. The
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (OSH Act) (29 U.S.C. 651 et
seq.) authorizes information collection by employers as necessary or
appropriate for enforcement of the OSH Act or for developing
information regarding the

causes and prevention of occupational injuries, illnesses, and
accidents (29 U.S.C. 657). The OSH Act also requires that OSHA obtain
such information with minimum burden upon employers, especially those
operating small businesses, and to reduce to the maximum extent
feasible unnecessary duplication of effort in obtaining information (29
U.S.C. 657).
    The following sections describe who uses the information collected
under each requirement, as well as how they use it.
    The EtO Standard (29 CFR 1910.1047) specifies a number of paperwork
requirements. The following is a brief description of the collection of
information requirements contained in the standard.
    The information collection requirements specified in the EtO
Standard protect workers from the adverse health effects that may
result from occupational exposure to ethylene oxide. The principal
information collection requirements in the EtO Standard include
conducting worker exposure monitoring, notifying workers of the
exposure, implementing a written compliance program, and implementing
medical surveillance of workers. Also, the examining physician must
provide specific information to ensure that workers receive a copy of
their medical examination results. The employer must maintain exposure-
monitoring and medical records for specific periods, and provide access
to these records by OSHA, the National Institute for Occupational
Safety and Health (NIOSH), the affected workers, and their authorized
representatives and other designated parties.

II. Special Issues for Comment

    OSHA has a particular interest in comments on the following issues:
     Whether the proposed information collection requirements
are necessary for the proper performance of the agency's functions to
protect workers, including whether the information is useful;
     The accuracy of OSHA's estimate of the burden (time and
costs) of the information collection requirements, including the
validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
     The quality, utility, and clarity of the information
collected; and
     Ways to minimize the burden on employers who must comply;
for example, by using automated or other technological information
collection, and transmission techniques.

III. Proposed Actions

    There is an overall adjustment decrease in burden hours for this
ICR. The burden hours have decreased a total of 1,005 hours (from
31,257 hours to 30,252 hours). The adjusted decrease is primarily due
to the estimated number of establishments covered by the standard.
    OSHA will summarize the comments submitted in response to this
notice and will include this summary in the request to OMB to extend
the approval of the information collection requirements.
    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.
    Title: Ethylene Oxide Standard.
    OMB Control Number: 1218-0108.
    Affected Public: Business or other for-profits.
    Number of Respondents: 2,026.
    Number of Responses: 109,708.
    Frequency of Responses: Initially, annually, on occasion.
    Average Time per Response: Various.
    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 30,252.
    Estimated Cost (Operation and Maintenance): $5,129,858.

IV. Public Participation--Submission of Comments on This Notice and
Internet Access to Comments and Submissions

    You may submit comments in response to this document as follows:
(1) electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal; (2) by facsimile (fax), if your comments, including
attachments, are not longer than 10 pages you may fax them to the OSHA
Docket Office at<PHONE_NUMBER>; or (3) by hard copy. All comments,
attachments, and other material must identify the agency name and the
OSHA docket number for the ICR Docket No. OSHA-2009-0035. You may
supplement electronic submissions by uploading document files
electronically.
    Comments and submissions are posted without change at http://www.regulations.gov. Therefore, OSHA cautions commenters about
submitting personal information such as Social Security Numbers and
dates of birth. Although all submissions are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index, some information (e.g., copyrighted
material) is not publicly available to read or download from this
website. All submissions, including copyrighted material, are available
for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office. Information on
using the http://www.regulations.gov website to submit comments and
access the docket is available at the website's ``User Tips'' link.
Contact the OSHA Docket Office at<PHONE_NUMBER>, (TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>)
for information about materials not available from the website, and for
assistance in using the internet to locate docket submissions.

Authority and Signature

    James S. Frederick, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, directed the preparation of this
notice. The authority for this notice is the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506 et seq.) and Secretary of Labor's Order No. 8-2020
(85 FR 58393).

    Signed at Washington, DC.
James S. Frederick,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2023-16565 Filed 8-2-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P