[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 213 (Wednesday, November 4, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68371-68373]
[FR Doc No: 2015-28025]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-76302 ; File No. SR-EDGX-2015-52]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change to Rule
21.8, Order Display and Book Processing

October 29, 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 October 28, 2015, EDGX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``EDGX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange
has designated this proposal as a ``non-controversial'' proposed rule
change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder,\4\ which renders it effective upon filing with the
Commission. 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.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).

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

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

    The Exchange filed a proposal to authorize the Exchange's equity
options platform (``EDGX Options'') to make a modification to Rule 21.8
(Order Display and Book Processing).
    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
Web site at www.batstrading.com, at the principal office of the
Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange is proposing to modify Rule 21.8, Order Display and
Book Processing, which sets forth the priority rules applicable to EDGX
Options. Specifically, Rule 21.8 describes the general priority rules
for EDGX Options, including that quotes and orders are prioritized by
price and then on a pro-rata basis according to size. Rule 21.8 also
describes additional priority overlays, including special priority
provisions for Customer orders, Directed Market Makers and Primary
Market Makers. The purpose of this rule filing is to make a minor
modification to the Directed Market Maker and Primary Market Maker
priority overlays, as described below.
    The Directed Market Maker overlay provides the Directed Market
Maker with priority over other participants for a certain percentage of
contracts allocated at the same price (60% or 40% depending upon the
number of other Market Maker quotes at the NBBO). Similarly, the
Primary Market Maker overlay provides Primary Market Makers with
priority over other participants for a certain percentage of contracts
allocated at the same price (60% or 40% depending upon the number of
other Market Maker quotes at the NBBO) and for small size orders. The
Exchange proposes to modify both of these priority overlays so that the
percentage allocation (60% or 40%) is dependent on the number of Market
Maker quotations or other non-Customer orders at the NBBO rather than
simply the number of other Market Maker quotations at the NBBO. The
Exchange believes that the amended rule would appropriately recognize
that other professional market participants, not just Market Makers,
may compete on the Exchange. Further, the rule as amended would be
consistent with the priority rules of both the International Securities
Exchange LLC (``ISE'') \5\ and NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC (``PHLX'').\6\ The
Exchange believes that the proposed change will have a positive
competitive impact on quoting by reducing the likelihood of a Primary
Market Maker or Directed Market Maker will receive the higher 60%
allocation by increasing the types of other participants and, in turn,
the number of orders from participants, that are considered when
allocating executions. In other words, because other non-Customer
orders will be considered, not just the quotes of other Market Makers,
such other non-Customers will be better incentivized to provide
liquidity at the NBBO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See ISE Rule 713(e) and Supplementary Material .01(b) to
Rule 713, which count the number of other ``Professional Orders''
for application of the priority rule. Professional Orders, in turn,
are defined in ISE Rule 100(a)(37C) as orders ``for the account of a
person or entity that is not a Priority Customer,'' and are thus
equivalent to non-Customer orders on the Exchange.
    \6\ See PHLX Rule 1014(g)(ii), which counts the number of
``controlled accounts'' for application of the priority rule.
Controlled accounts are accounts ``controlled by or under common
control with a broker-dealer'', and thus, apply to a broader range
of participants than just market makers or the equivalent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its 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) of the Act.\7\ In particular, the
proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \8\ because it
is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices,
to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster
cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating
transactions in securities, to remove impediments to, and perfect the
mechanism of, a free and open market and a national market system and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change will allow the Exchange to launch the EDGX
Options platform with a priority allocation model that allocates a
different percentage of contracts to Directed Market Makers and Primary
Market Makers, either 60% or 40%, depending on whether there is more
than one non-Customer with an order at the NBBO rather than whether
there is more than one Market Maker at the NBBO. The Exchange believes
that the change is appropriate and consistent with the Act because it
recognizes that other professional participants, not just Market
Makers, can compete for orders with Directed Market Makers and Primary
Market Makers. As noted above, certain other options exchanges operate
with a similar priority rule.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See supra notes 5 and 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(B) Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed rule change is
not designed to address any competitive issues but rather to make a
modification to the Exchange's priority rule prior to the launch of
EDGX Options. As noted above, the change would make the Exchange's
priority rule similar to that of certain other options exchanges.\10\
As noted above, the Exchange believes that the proposed change will
have a positive competitive impact on quoting by reducing the
likelihood of a Primary Market Maker or Directed Market Maker will
receive the higher 60% allocation by increasing the types of other
participants and, in turn, the number of orders from participants, that
are considered when allocating executions. In other words, because
other non-Customer orders will be considered, not just the quotes of
other Market Makers, such other non-Customers will be better
incentivized to provide liquidity at the NBBO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any written comments from members or other interested parties.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (A)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (B) impose any significant burden on competition; and (C) by
its terms, 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) of the Act \11\ and
paragraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). As required under Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii), the Exchange provided the Commission with written
notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a
brief description and the text of 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \13\ normally
does not become operative for 30 days after the date of filing.
However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \14\ permits the Commission to designate
a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked the
Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal may
become operative immediately upon filing. The Exchange notes that the
commencement of the operations of EDGX Options is scheduled for
November 2, 2015, and waiver of the 30-day operative delay would permit
the Exchange to launch EDGX Options with the proposed priority
allocation model. The Exchange also notes that the proposed rule change
is similar to priority rules already in place on other options
exchanges and does not raise any new policy issues. Based on the
foregoing, the Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative
delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public
interest.\15\ The Commission hereby grants the Exchange's request and
designates the proposal operative upon filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \15\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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: (1)
Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (2) for the protection
of investors; or (3) 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 proposal 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 No. SR-EDGX-2015-52 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-EDGX-2015-52. 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 will also be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-EDGX-2015-52 and should be
submitted on or before November 25, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-28025 Filed 11-3-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


From: Robert A Reich < Robert. A. Reich@ USA. dupont. com>

To: < thomas. finseth@ erg. com>

Date: 2/ 28/ 2005 4: 49: 19 PM Subject: DuPont TiO2 Plants  Responses to Inquiries re TRI Water Emissions Thomas J. Finseth ERG Dear Mr. Finseth:

Attached below you will find the information you requested regarding the DuPont reporting of emissions to water from two of the Company's Titanium Dioxide manufacturing facilities under the US EPA Toxic Release Inventory for 2002. Kenneth Wood from our company has been your primary contact on this and has taken the lead role in compiling this material. However, in Ken's absence I am submitting the information. Please feel free to contact me while Ken is traveling outside the country for a couple of weeks. ( Weather permitting I will be on the road within the U. S. this week, but will be checking messages regularly.)

In reviewing the information, we have noted that a considerable portion was based on samples collected prior to 2002, contemporaneous non detect results and other estimation methods. We also note that in some cases there have been subsequent reductions in emissions that we have determined through more recent sampling. We plan to provide further information in the near future after we have had an opportunity to compile, review and further understand this data.

In this light we hope that you will review with DuPont any conclusions that you draw from the information that we submit in order to assure that this information has been correctly interpreted.

Very truly yours,

Robert A. Reich, P. E.

Principal Consultant Environmental Engineering DuPont Engineering Technology Ph: 302 774 8022 Fx: 302 774 8110 Attachment This communication is for use by the intended recipient and contains information that may be privileged, confidential or copyrighted under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby formally notified that any use, copying or distribution of this e mail,

in whole or in part, is strictly prohibited. Please notify the sender by return e mail and delete this e mail from your system. Unless explicitly and conspicuously designated as " E Contract Intended",

this e mail does not constitute a contract offer, a contract amendment,

or an acceptance of a contract offer. This e mail does not constitute a consent to the use of sender's contact information for direct marketing purposes or for transfers of data to third parties.

Francais Deutsch Italiano Espanol Portugues Japanese Chinese Korean http:// www. DuPont. com/ corp/ email_ disclaimer. html CC: Kenneth N Wood < Kenneth. N. Wood@ USA. dupont. com>


                EPA ICR No. 1365.10; OMB Control No. 2070-0091

                                 Attachment F

      Copy of Consultations Message Sent by EPA to Potential Respondents

From: Courtnage, Robert
Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2013 5:02 PM
Subject: Renewal of Information Collection Request for the EPA Asbestos Model Accreditation Plan and Asbestos-Containing Materials in Schools Rule Dear Stakeholder:

      On August 8, 2013, EPA published a Notice in the Federal Register (78 FR 48431) titled "Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection of Several Currently Approved Collections; Comment Request" (See http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EPA-HQ-OPPT-2012-0916-0001) This Notice refers to EPA's intention to request renewed Office of Management and Budget (OMB) clearance of an information collection related to reporting and/or recordkeeping requirements for the Asbestos-Containing Materials in Schools Rule and the Asbestos Model Accreditation Plan Rule. The Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA), or Title II of the Toxic Substances Control Act, became law on October 22, 1986. To implement AHERA, EPA promulgated the Asbestos-Containing Materials in Schools Rule (40 CFR Part 763, Subpart E) on October 30, 1987. Public school districts and non-profit private schools (collectively called local education agencies) are subject to AHERA's requirements.

      The Asbestos-Containing Materials in Schools rule requires local education agencies to take actions such as:

::	Perform an original inspection and re-inspection of school buildings every three years of asbestos-containing material;
::	Develop, maintain, and update an asbestos management plan and keep a copy at the school;
::	Provide yearly notification to parent, teacher, and employee organizations regarding the availability of the school's asbestos management plan and any asbestos abatement actions taken or planned in the school;
::	Designate a contact person to ensure the responsibilities of the local education agency are properly implemented;
::	Perform periodic surveillance of known or suspected asbestos-containing building material;
::	Ensure that properly-accredited professionals perform inspections and response actions and prepare management plans; and
::	Provide custodial staff with asbestos-awareness training.

      EPA revised the Asbestos Model Accreditation Plan (MAP) (40 CFR Part 763, Appendix C to Subpart E) on February 3, 1994. The MAP requires the use of trained and accredited asbestos professionals when conducting asbestos inspections or designing or conducting response actions at schools and public and commercial buildings. It provides guidance to states on the minimum training requirements for accrediting asbestos professionals. State training programs must be at least as stringent as the MAP. The MAP established five required training disciplines (worker, contractor/supervisor, inspector, management planner, and project designer) and one recommended discipline (project monitor). States were tasked to develop their own asbestos professional training programs based on the MAP that was no less stringent.

      In addition to public notice and comment requirement that the above Notice initiates, OMB regulations at 5 CFR 1320.8(d)(1)) require agencies to consult with potential respondents and data users about specific aspects of an information collection request (ICR) before submitting it to OMB for review and approval, regardless, in the case of ICR renewals, of whether changes have or have not been made to the collection activity.

      As part of this required consultation, I am contacting you to solicit your input. Please note that if you take this opportunity to provide input, your name, affiliation, e-mail address, phone number and any information you provide (e.g., copies of e-mails) will be incorporated and attached to the ICR supporting statement, which will be a public document.  In addition, the OMB Desk Examiner for the ICR in question may contact you to verify the accuracy of any comments EPA identifies in the ICR.

      EPA solicits your input on the following questions:

1.	Are the data that EPA seeks under this ICR available from any public source, or already collected by another EPA office or by another agency? If so, where can the data be found?
2.	Is it clear what is required for data submission? If not, are there any suggestions for clarifying instructions?
3.	Would you be interested in an electronic data submission option?
4.	For electronic submission, how should signature requirements be handled?
5.	How does TSCA CBI affect your choice or use of an electronic medium?  Would you be more inclined to submit TSCA CBI on diskette than on paper and what benefits would you realize (e.g., burden reduction, greater efficiency in compiling information, etc).
6.	Do you agree with EPA's estimated burden and costs (the ICR addresses only the costs associated with paperwork)? Are the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) labor rates accurate?  If you have any reason to consider the BLS labor rates as used by EPA inaccurate or inappropriate, explain your rationale.

      To access the Federal Register Notice, the ICR supporting document, and any public comments received to date:

::	go to: http://www.regulations.gov
::	enter EPA-HQ-OPPT-2012-0916 in the Enter Keyword or ID field
::	click on "Search"
::	then click on any of the documents listed within the docket to read the document; you will be most interested in the Supporting Statement, identified by its title beginning "Information Collection Request..."

      Your response will be greatly appreciated. If you have any comments in response to the above questions, or with respect to any other part of the information collection, please respond by return e-mail by October 8, 2013. EPA will consider those responses, as well as any public comments received in response to the Federal Register Notice identified above, in preparing a final document for OMB review.

Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely,

Robert T. Courtnage, Environmental Protection Specialist
National Program Chemicals Division
Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
202-566-1081


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 181 (Tuesday, September 18, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57574-57575]
[FR Doc No: 2012-22985]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4080-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2012-0002]

Louisiana; Amendment No. 9 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Louisiana (FEMA-4080-DR), dated August 29, 2012, and
related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: September 10, 2012.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that the incident
period for this disaster is closed effective September 10, 2012.

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

(Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation
Grant.)

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2012-22985 Filed 9-17-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


Pre Validation of the Aromatase Assay using Human and Bovine Placental, and Human Recombinant Microsomes Endocrine Disruptor Methods Validation Subcommittee ( EDMVS)

Plenary Session June 5, 2003 Research Triangle Park, North Carolina ° RTI International is a tradename of Research Triangle Institute. Overview

Background: Aromatase ( CYP19)

Study Goals

Substrate characterization

Placenta tissues   human, bovine, porcine

Methods

Results Protein yield P450 Spectra Aromatase activities

Conclusions

Future studies Aromatase

Cytochrome P450 enzyme   CYP19

Present in the gonads and placenta

Responsible for the biosynthesis of estrogen steroid hormones

Can be inhibited at the level of gene expression ( e. g., ethylhexylphthalate), or directly at enzyme ( e. g. azoles) Steroid Hormone Biosynthesis by Aromatase O O H O2, NADPH CYP19 O O HO HO O2, NADPH CYP19 androstenedione 19 hydroxyandrostenedione O O HO 19,19 dihydroxyandrostenedione O HO estrone  HCOOH H2O O O O HO O O O O Fe 3 + CYP19 O2, NADPH peroxy enzyme intermediate 19 oxoandrostenedione  H2O Steroid Hormone Biosynthesis by Aromatase ( cont'd)

O H O O OH androstenedione   17  HSD testosterone aromatase HO OH estradiol + H2O + HCOOH Study Goals The goal of this work is to identify the optimal factors and conditions for the assay of aromatase, including:

Characterization of radiolabeled substrate ( androstenedione)

Selection of mammalian placenta allowing sufficient yield of catalytically active microsomal protein, and assessment of human recombinant CYP19

Optimization of assay with respect to concentration of protein, cofactors,

substrate, and incubation time using a factorial design

Using this optimized assay, determine the effect of selected substances on aromatase activity Substrate Characterization Sources

Nonradiolabeled 4 androstene 3,17 dione ( 99%): Sigma Chemical Co.

Radiolabeled [ 1  3H( N)] androst 4 ene 3,17 dione: Perkin Elmer Life Science

Specific activity: 25.3 Ci/ mmol

Radiochemical purity: 98% HPLC Radiochromatogram for [ 3H] Androstenedione Samp leName 1 : 1 1 069 1 43A: 4 1C ; Vial 5; In jectio n 1; Cha nn el 2487C ha nne l 1 ; D ate Acq uire d 2/ 19 / 0 3 4: 36: 08 PM SampleName 1 : 1 1 0691 43A: 4 1C ; Vial 5; Injection 1; C hannel SATIN ; D ate Acquired 2 / 19/ 03 4 : 36: 08 PM  0 .02 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06  2 .00 0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10 .00 M inu tes 2. 00 4. 00 6. 00 8. 00 10 .00 12 .00 14 .00 16 .00 18 .00 20 .00 Column : Zorbax SB C1 8, U SCL0 119 03 , 25 0 x 4.6 mm Mob ile Phase : 55: 15 : 30 ddH2O: THF: MeOH 10691  95A Flow R ate: 1 mL/ m in Detecto rs: Waters 2487 at 240 nm B RAM with 250 u l LiGL solid cell, # 115 90 1 2 N am e RT Area H eight AS DN [ 3H ] A SDN 14 .50 6 14 .62 5 29 3714 33 7219 11 441 11 235 Pea k Re sults Placental Tissues http:// www. vivo. colostate. edu/ hbooks/ pathphys/ reprod/ placenta/ structure. html Placental Tissues ( con't)

http:// www. vivo. colostate. edu/ hbooks/ pathphys/ reprod/ placenta/ ruminants. html Placenta Tissues ( con't) Methods Preparation of microsomes from tissues

Iced down ( not frozen!) within 10 min of delivery

Soft tissue harvested, homogenized in cold buffer

Homogenate centrifuged @ 10,000g for 30 min, 4 ° C

Supernatant centrifuged @ 100,000g for 60 min, 4 ° C

Pellet resuspended in buffer, centrifuged @ 100,000g for 60 min, 4 ° C

Pellet " washed" by repeating above

Resuspended in buffer, protein concentration determined Spectral P450 content determination: difference spectrum, 400   500 nm, of CO vs.

CO/ dithionite reduced microsomes, quantitation using extinction coefficient for the 450 nm absorbance of 100 mM 1 cm 1 Addition of the following into 16 x 100 mm test tubes:

0.1 mL propylene glycol 50.0 nM 3H androstenedione ( 0.1 µ Ci)

1.7 mM NADP+

2.8 mM glucose 6 phosphate 1.0 u glucose 6 phosphate dehydrogenase Dilute to 1.0 mL volume with phosphate buffer, pH 7.4,

and warm to 37 ° C Preparation of placental or recombinant microsomal pellet Suspension of placental or recombinant microsomes and dilution to ~ 0.1 mg/ mL in phosphate buffer Warm microsomes to 37 ° C Add 1.0 mL placental microsomal suspension to each test tube Incubate at 37 ° C for 30 minutes in shaking water bath Methods ( cont'd) Add 2.0 mL of CH2Cl2 to quench enzyme reaction; vortex for 30 seconds; centrifuge for 10 minutes at 500 rpm Transfer organic layer to a capped vial.

Add 2.0 mL of CH2Cl2 to test tube containing aqueous layer; vortex for 30 seconds; centrifuge for 10 minutes at 500 rpm Transfer organic layer to a capped vial.

Add 2.0 mL of CH2Cl2 to test tube containing aqueous layer; vortex for 30 seconds; centrifuge for 10 minutes at 500 rpm Transfer organic layer to a capped vial. Prepare aliquots of each organic extract for analysis by LSC.

Transfer aqueous layer to a capped vial; transfer 0.5 mL to a LSC vial; add 10.0 mL scintillation cocktail; count in LSC.

Methods ( cont'd) Tissue Procurement Issues Human placenta

Caesarian section allows for 1) timed delivery and optimal collection conditions, and 2)

less chance of disease transmission Bovine and porcine

Requires farms close to laboratories, assistance of farm staff

Deliveries seasonal, and any time of day P450 Difference Spectrum Human Recombinant CYP19 Results ( cont'd)

Preoptimization Results Enzyme Source Microsomal protein yield ( mg/ g wet tissue processed) P450 Content ( nmol/ mg protein) Aromatas e Activity ( nmol/ mg   min)

Human placenta 900/ 511.79 ( 1.76 mg/ g) 0.048 0.015a Human Recombinant  0.38 0.022 Bovine placenta 675/ 748.99 ( 0.9 mg/ g) 0.031 0.003b Porcine placenta* 126/ 257.44 ( 0.49 mg/ g) 0.053 0.003 * Only 1 of 5 porcine placentas yielded microsomes with acceptable aromatase activity a Acceptance criteria: 0.005 nmol product/ mg protein/ min b Literature value: 0.0036 ± 0.00078 nmol estrone formed/ mg protein/ min ( Tsumagari et al. ( 1993). J. Reprod. Fert. 1993, 98, 631 36.) Conclusions Collection conditions used for placentas are crucial to activity Human Placentas

easiest to collect under optimal conditions

well defined morphology and good yield of microsomal protein

high activity

Human recombinant, comparable activity with best placental preparations However,

SOPs must be in place for handing potentially infectious materials

Although Caesarian vs. birth canal delivery minimizes infection of the placental tissue,

information regarding screening for HIV, hepatitis, etc. should be obtained if available. Future Studies Optimization of conditions using a factorial design Summary of Experimental Factors and Levels to be Optimized Experimental Factor Levels Experimental Factors Units 1 2 3 4 5 NADP+ mM 0.1 0.5 1 2 4 Glucose 6 Phosphate mM 0.1 1 2 3 4 Glucose 6 Phosphate Dehydrogenase units 0.1 0.5 1 2 4 Androstenedione ( substrate) nM 10 25 50 100 500 Protein mg/ mL 0.01 0.02 0.1 0.5 1 Incubation Time min 10 15 30 60 120 Future Studies Determination of variance of the optimized assay

Using the optimized conditions determined for each preparation,

three technicians independently conduct the assay on three separate days

The results are assessed for technician to technician and day

today variance. Future Studies Determination of IC 50 for:

aminoglutethimide ( non steroidal aromatase Inhibitor)

4 hydroxyandrostenedione ( potent steroidal aromatase inhibitor

chrysin ( potent flavonoid)

genistein ( weak isoflavonoid)

ketoconazole ( weak imidazole anti fungal)

econazole ( potent imidazole anti fungal)

atrazine ( affects aromatase gene expression; no aromatase inhibition)

bis( 2 ethylhexyl) phthlate ( affects aromatase gene expression; no aromatase inhibition)

nonylphenol ( affects AR/ ER; no aromatase inhibition)

lindane ( affects StAR and cholesterol metabolism; no aromatase inhibition)

dibenz( a, h) anthracene Acknowledgements Study Plans Dr. Robert Brueggemeier ( Ohio State University)

Dr. Jerry Johnson ( Battelle)

Placental Tissues Dr. Amy Murtha ( Duke University)

Mr. Rick Kern ( North Carolina State University)

Mr. Curtis Powell ( North Carolina State University)

RTI International Ms. Sherry Black Ms. Purvi Patel


[Federal Register: March 20, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 53)]
[Notices]
[Page 11991-11992]
[DOCID:fr20mr09-117]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-1998-4334; FMCSA-2000-7918; FMCSA-2002-12844; FMCSA-
2002-13411; FMCSA-2003-14223; FMCSA-2005-20027; FMCSA-2006-26066;
FMCSA-2006-25246]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision

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

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

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to renew the exemptions from the
vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations for
23 individuals. FMCSA has statutory authority to exempt individuals
from the vision requirement if the exemptions granted will not
compromise safety. The Agency has concluded that granting these
exemption renewals will provide a level of safety that is equivalent
to, or greater than, the level of safety maintained without the
exemptions for these commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers.

DATES: This decision is effective April 21, 2009. Comments must be
received on or before April 20, 2009.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket ID FMCSA-1998-4334; FMCSA-2000-7918;
FMCSA-2002-12844; FMCSA-2002-13411; FMCSA-2003-14223; FMCSA-2005-20027;
FMCSA-2006-26066; FMCSA-2006-25246, using any of the following methods.
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building Ground
Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Each submission must include the Agency name and the docket number
for this Notice. Note that DOT posts all comments received without
change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information included in a comment. Please see the Privacy Act heading
below.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The FDMS is available 24 hours each day, 365
days each year. If you want acknowledgment that we received your
comments, please include a self-addressed, stamped envelope or postcard
or print the acknowledgement page that appears after submitting
comments On-line.
    Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19476). This information is
also available at http://DocketInfo.dot.gov.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

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

Exemption Decision

    This notice addresses 23 individuals who have requested a renewal
of their exemption in accordance with FMCSA procedures. FMCSA has
evaluated these 23 applications for renewal on their merits and decided
to extend each exemption for a renewable two-year period. They are:

Lucas R. Aleman                      William R. New
Rodger B. Anders                     Kirby G. Oathout
John D. Bolding, Jr.                 John J. Payne
Timothy E. Coultas                   James R. Petre
Michael P. Curtin                    Zeljko Popovac
Jimmy W. Deadwyler                   Jerald W. Rehnke
William E. Dolson                    William E. Reveal
Richard L. Elyard                    James R. Rieck
William H. Goss                      Duane L. Riendeau
James K. Holmes                      Richie J. Schwendy
Christopher J. Kane                  Janusz Tyrpien
William R. Mayfield

    These exemptions are extended subject to the following conditions:
(1) That each individual have a physical examination every year (a) by
an ophthalmologist or optometrist who attests that the vision in the
better eye continues to meet the standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), and
(b) by a medical examiner who attests that the individual is otherwise
physically qualified under 49 CFR 391.41; (2) that each individual
provide a copy of the ophthalmologist's or optometrist's report to the
medical examiner at the time of the annual medical examination; and (3)
that each individual provide a copy of the annual medical certification
to the employer for retention in the driver's qualification file and
retain a copy of the certification on his/her person while driving for
presentation to a duly authorized Federal, State, or local enforcement
official. Each exemption will be valid for two years unless rescinded
earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be rescinded if: (1) The person
fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the
exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained
before it was granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not
be consistent with the goals and

objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315.

Basis for Renewing Exemptions

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(1), an exemption may be granted for no
longer than two years from its approval date and may be renewed upon
application for additional two year periods. In accordance with 49
U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each of the 23 applicants has satisfied the
entry conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision
requirements (63 FR 66226; 64 FR 16517; 66 FR 17994; 68 FR 15037; 70 FR
16886; 72 FR 18726; 65 FR 66286; 66 FR 13825; 68 FR 10300; 70 FR 7546;
72 FR 7111; 67 FR 68719; 68 FR 2629; 70 FR 14747; 67 FR 76439; 68 FR
10298; 70 FR 7545; 72 FR 18727; 68 FR 10301; 68 FR 19596; 70 FR 2701;
70 FR 16887; 71 FR 63379; 72 FR 1050; 72 FR 180; 72 FR 9397). Each of
these 23 applicants has requested renewal of the exemption and has
submitted evidence showing that the vision in the better eye continues
to meet the standard specified at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) and that the
vision impairment is stable. In addition, a review of each record of
safety while driving with the respective vision deficiencies over the
past two years indicates each applicant continues to meet the vision
exemption standards. These factors provide an adequate basis for
predicting each driver's ability to continue to drive safely in
interstate commerce. Therefore, FMCSA concludes that extending the
exemption for each renewal applicant for a period of two years is
likely to achieve a level of safety equal to that existing without the
exemption.

Request for Comments

    FMCSA will review comments received at any time concerning a
particular driver's safety record and determine if the continuation of
the exemption is consistent with the requirements at 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315. However, FMCSA requests that interested parties with
specific data concerning the safety records of these drivers submit
comments by April 20, 2009.
    FMCSA believes that the requirements for a renewal of an exemption
under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 can be satisfied by initially
granting the renewal and then requesting and evaluating, if needed,
subsequent comments submitted by interested parties. As indicated
above, the Agency previously published notices of final disposition
announcing its decision to exempt these 23 individuals from the vision
requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). The final decision to grant an
exemption to each of these individuals was based on the merits of each
case and only after careful consideration of the comments received to
its notices of applications. The notices of applications stated in
detail the qualifications, experience, and medical condition of each
applicant for an exemption from the vision requirements. That
information is available by consulting the above cited Federal Register
publications.
    Interested parties or organizations possessing information that
would otherwise show that any, or all of these drivers, are not
currently achieving the statutory level of safety should immediately
notify FMCSA.
    The Agency will evaluate any adverse evidence submitted and, if
safety is being compromised or if continuation of the exemption would
not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315, FMCSA will take immediate steps to revoke the exemption of a
driver.

    Issued on: March 16, 2009.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy and Program Development.
 [FR Doc. E9-6060 Filed 3-19-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 143 (Thursday, July 27, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 34961]
[FR Doc No: 2017-15802]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2017-0158]

Information Collection Request to Office of Management and
Budget; OMB; Control Number: 1625-0017

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Sixty-day notice requesting comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the
U.S. Coast Guard intends to submit an Information Collection Request
(ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), requesting an extension of
its approval for the following collection of information: 1625-0017,
Various International Agreement Safety Certificates and Documents;
without change. Our ICR describes the information we seek to collect
from the public. Before submitting this ICR to OIRA, the Coast Guard is
inviting comments as described below.

DATES: Comments must reach the Coast Guard on or before September 25,
2017.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket
number [USCG-2017-0158] to the Coast Guard using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public
participation and request for comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section for further instructions on submitting comments.
    A copy of the ICR is available through the docket on the Internet
at http://www.regulations.gov. Additionally, copies are available from:
Commandant (CG-612), Attn: Paperwork Reduction Act Manager, U.S. Coast
Guard, 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Ave. SE., Stop 7710, Washington, DC
20593-7710.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Anthony Smith, Office of
Information Management, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, or fax<PHONE_NUMBER>,
for questions on these documents.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    This Notice relies on the authority of the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended. An ICR is an application to
OIRA seeking the approval, extension, or renewal of a Coast Guard
collection of information (Collection). The ICR contains information
describing the Collection's purpose, the Collection's likely burden on
the affected public, an explanation of the necessity of the Collection,
and other important information describing the Collection. There is one
ICR for each Collection.
    The Coast Guard invites comments on whether this ICR should be
granted based on the Collection being necessary for the proper
performance of Departmental functions. In particular, the Coast Guard
would appreciate comments addressing: (1) The practical utility of the
Collection; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden of the Collection;
(3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of information
subject to the Collection; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the
Collection on respondents, including the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. In response to
your comments, we may revise this ICR or decide not to seek an
extension of approval for the Collection. We will consider all comments
and material received during the comment period.
    We encourage you to respond to this request by submitting comments
and related materials. Comments must contain the OMB Control Number of
the ICR and the docket number of this request, [USCG-2017-0158], and
must be received by September 25, 2017.

Submitting Comments

    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate
instructions. Documents mentioned in this notice, and all public
comments, are in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and
can be viewed by following that Web site's instructions. Additionally,
if you go to the online docket and sign up for email alerts, you will
be notified when comments are posted.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the
docket, you may review a Privacy Act notice regarding the Federal
Docket Management System in the March 24, 2005, issue of the Federal
Register (70 FR 15086).

Information Collection Request

    Title: Various International Agreement Safety Certificates and
Documents.
    OMB Control Number: 1625-0017.
    Summary: These Coast Guard issued forms are used as evidence of
compliance with the International Convention for Safety of Life at Sea,
1974 (SOLAS) by certain U.S. vessels on international voyages. Without
the proper certificates or documents, a U.S. vessel could be detained
in a foreign port.
    Need: SOLAS applies to all mechanically propelled cargo vessels of
500 or more gross tons (GT), and to all mechanically propelled
passenger vessels carrying more than 12 passengers that engage in
international voyages. SOLAS and title 46 CFR 2.01-25 list certificates
and documents that may be issued to vessels.
    Forms: CG-967, Exemption Certificate; CG-968, Passenger Ship Safety
Certificate; CG-968A, Record of Equipment for the Passenger Ship Safety
Certificate (Form P); CG-969, Notice of Completion of Examination for
Safety Certificate; CG-3347, Cargo Ship Safety Equipment Certificate;
CG-3347B, Record of Equipment for the Cargo Ship Safety Equipment
Certificate (Form E); CG-4359, Cargo Ship Safety Construction
Certificate; CG-4360, International Ship Security Certificate; CG-4361,
Interim International Ship Security Certificate; CG-5643, Safety
Management Certificate; CG-5679, High-Speed Craft Safety Certificate;
CG-5679A, Record of Equipment for High-Speed Craft Safety Certificate;
CG-5680, Permit to Operate High-Speed Craft; CG-6038, Continuous
Synopsis Record (CSR) Document Number __for the ship with IMO Number:
__; CG-6038A, Amendments to the Continuous Synopsis Record (CSR)
Document Number __for the ship with IMO Number:__.
    Respondents: Owners and operators of SOLAS vessels.
    Frequency: On occasion.
    Hour Burden Estimate: The estimated burden has decreased from 94
hours to 90 hours a year due to a decrease in the estimated annual
number of responses.

    Authority:  The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35, as amended.

    Dated: July 18, 2017.
Marilyn Scott-Perez,
U.S. Coast Guard, Chief, Office of Information Management.
[FR Doc. 2017-15802 Filed 7-26-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 127 (Thursday, July 2, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37992-37994]
[FR Doc No: 2015-16400]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 262

[EPA-HQ-RCRA-2005-0018; FRL-9929-93-OSWER]

Transboundary Shipments of Hazardous Wastes Between OECD Member
Countries: Revisions to the List of OECD Member Countries

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency)
is amending certain existing regulations that apply to the
transboundary movement of hazardous waste among the Organization for
Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Member countries as
promulgated under the hazardous waste provisions of the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Specifically, EPA is updating the
list of OECD member countries to add Estonia, Israel, and Slovenia.
This amendment is necessary to accurately reflect the change in OECD
Member countries that have implemented OECD Decision C(2001)107 and can
trade hazardous wastes for recovery operations with other OECD
countries under the procedure set forth in that Decision.

DATES: This final rule is effective on July 2, 2015.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-RCRA-2005-0018. All documents in the docket are listed on
the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically through
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA Docket Center, EPA/DC,
WJC West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington,
DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the
Public Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the
RCRA Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen Swetland, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery, (MC:
5304P), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC, 20460, Phone:
703-308-8421; or by email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action applies to all persons who export or import hazardous
waste, export or import universal waste, or export spent lead-acid
batteries destined for recovery operations in OECD Member countries,
except for Mexico

and Canada. Any transboundary movement of hazardous wastes between the
United States and either Mexico or Canada will continue to be governed
(or addressed) by their respective bilateral agreements and applicable
regulations. Potentially affected entities may include, but are not
limited to:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Industry sector                        NAICS Code
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Utilities...............................................          221100
Petroleum and Coal Products Manufacturing...............             324
Chemical Manufacturing..................................          325100
Primary Metal Manufacturing.............................             331
Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing..................             332
Machinery Manufacturing.................................             333
Computer and Electronic Product Manufacturing...........          334110
Electrical Equipment, Appliance, and Component                       335
 Manufacturing..........................................
Transportation Equipment Manufacturing..................             336
Miscellaneous Manufacturing.............................          339900
Scrap and Waste Materials...............................          423930
Material Recovery Facilities............................          562920
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This list is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this section could also
be affected. The North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes have been provided to assist you and others in
determining whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you
have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a
particular entity, consult the person listed under the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document.

B. How can I get copies of this document and other related information?

    The current information is as follows:
     Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-RCRA-2005-0018.
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.

II. What does this amendment do?

    This amendment updates the list of OECD member countries that have
implemented OECD Decision C(2001)107 and can trade hazardous wastes for
recovery operations with other OECD countries under the procedure set
forth in that Decision. On January 8, 2010, EPA published a final rule
in the Federal Register (75 FR 1236), revising Agency regulations
including provisions on the transboundary movement of hazardous waste
for recovery operations among OECD Member countries. In that final
rule, EPA identified thirty OECD Member countries (including Canada and
Mexico). That document was accurate and current at the time of
publication; however, Estonia, Israel, and Slovenia have since joined
the OECD and implemented OECD Decision C(2001)107. As an OECD Member
country, the United States, is legally obligated to implement OECD
Decisions with respect to all OECD Member countries. Therefore, EPA is
adding Estonia, Israel, and Slovenia to update the list of countries in
40 CFR part 262.58(a)(1).

III. Why is this amendment issued as a final rule?

    Section 553 of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(3)(B), provides that, when an Agency for good cause finds that
notice and public procedure are impracticable, unnecessary or contrary
to the public interest, the Agency may issue a final rule without
providing notice and an opportunity for public comment. EPA believes
notice and an opportunity for comment on this amendment to Sec.
262.58(a)(1) to reflect updates to the list of OECD Member countries
would be unnecessary, because the United States, as an OECD Member
country, is legally obligated to implement OECD Decision C(2001)107
with respect to all OECD Member countries, which now include the
addition of Estonia, Israel and Slovenia. Thus, EPA must amend its OECD
regulations to add these three countries, and any public comment would
be unnecessary for these particular amendments because EPA does not
have any discretion as to which OECD countries its regulations must
include. EPA finds that this situation constitutes good cause under 5
U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B).

IV. Do any of the statutory and executive order reviews apply to this
action?

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and
Executive Order 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011), this action is
not a ``significant regulatory action'' and is therefore not subject to
OMB review. Because this action is not subject to notice and comment
requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any other
statute, it is not subject to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.
601 et seq.) or Sections 202 and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act of 1999 (UMRA) (Pub. L. 104-4). In addition, this action does not
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. This action does
not create new binding legal requirements that substantially and
directly affect Tribes under Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000). This action does not have significant Federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999). Because this final rule has been exempted from review under
Executive Order 12866, this final rule is not subject to Executive
Order 13211, entitled Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly
Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001)
or Executive Order 13045, entitled Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997). This final rule does not contain any information collections
subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq., nor does it require any special considerations
under Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). This action does not
involve technical standards; thus, the requirements of Section 12(d) of
the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C.
272 note) do not apply.

A. Congressional Review Act

    This action is subject to the Congressional Review Act (CRA), and
the EPA will submit a rule report to each House of Congress and to the
Comptroller General of the United States. The CRA allows the issuing
agency to make a rule effective sooner than otherwise provided by the
CRA if the agency makes a good cause finding that notice and comment
rulemaking procedures are impracticable, unnecessary or contrary to the
public interest (5 U.S.C. 808(2)). The EPA has made a good cause
finding for this rule as discussed in Section III of the preamble,
including the basis for that finding.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 262

    Environmental protection, Exports, Hazardous materials
transportation, Hazardous waste, Imports, Labeling, Packaging and
containers, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: June 22, 2015.
Mathy Stanislaus,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of the
Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 262--STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO GENERATORS OF HAZARDOUS WASTE

0
1. The authority citation for Part 262 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6906, 6912, 6922-6925, 6937, and 6938.

0
2. Amend Sec.  262.58 by revising paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows:

Sec.  262.58  International agreements.

    (a) * * *
    (1) For the purposes of subpart H, the designated OECD Member
countries consist of Australia, Austria, Belgium, the Czech Republic,
Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland,
Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, New
Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, the Republic of Korea, the Slovak
Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the United
Kingdom, and the United States.
* * * * *

[FR Doc. 2015-16400 Filed 7-1-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 236 (Monday, December 9, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67302-67304]
[FR Doc No: 2019-26409]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-87647; File No. SR-IEX-2019-13]

Self-Regulatory Organizations: Investors Exchange LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Rule 11.380 To Expand the Exchange's Optional Aggregate Risk Controls
Mechanism To Include a Net Notional Exposure Risk Check in Addition to
the Gross Notional Exposure Risk Check

December 3, 2019.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby given
that, on November 27, 2019, the Investors Exchange LLC (``IEX'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Pursuant to the provisions of Section 19(b)(1) under the Act,\4\
and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\5\ IEX is filing with the Commission a
proposed rule change to amend Rule 11.380 to offer an optional net
notional exposure risk check to Members and their clearing firms as
part of the Exchange's Aggregate Risk Controls mechanism. The Exchange
has designated this rule change as non-controversial under Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \6\ and provided the Commission with the notice
required by Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \5\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \7\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
website at www.iextrading.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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 11.380 to offer an optional net
notional exposure risk check to Members and their clearing firms as
part of the Exchange's Aggregate Risk Controls (``ARC'') mechanism.
Rule 11.380, entitled Risk Management, describes the Exchange's current
optional ARC mechanism that is designed to assist IEX Members \8\ and
their clearing firms in their risk management efforts. IEX does not
charge a fee for use of the ARC mechanism. As described in the rule,
the ARC mechanism currently can be configured to provide trading limits
based on the gross notional exposure for matched and

routed trades for a Member or clearing firm's broker correspondent
across MPIDs, by MPID, by FIX session or in combination, per clearing
firm relationship or Member, as applicable (``Gross Notional
Exposure''). Once the Gross Notional Exposure, as elected and
configured by a Member or its clearing firm, has exceeded the pre-
determined limit, IEX will automatically reject new orders and cancel
all open orders for the applicable MPID(s) and/or FIX session
specified. Further, the Gross Notional Exposure risk control may be
increased or decreased on an intra-day basis by a Member or the
clearing firm of a Member, as applicable. As specified in paragraph
(a)(2)(A) of Rule 11.380, Gross Notional Exposure is calculated as the
absolute sum of the notional value of all buy and sell trades (i.e.,
equal to the value of executed buys plus the absolute value of executed
long sells plus the absolute value of executed short sells). There is
no netting of buys and sales in the same symbol or across symbols. And
the Gross Notional Exposure resets for each new trading day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Rule 1.160(s).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    IEX proposes to revise the rule to provide Members or the clearing
firms of Members with an additional option of configuring an ARC
trading limit on the net notional exposure for matched and routed
trades for a Member or clearing firm's broker correspondent across
MPIDs, by MPID, by FIX session or in combination, per clearing firm
relationship or Member as applicable (``Net Notional Exposure''). IEX
notes that other exchanges offer their members the option of a risk
control based upon the member's net notional exposure.\9\ As proposed,
once the Net Notional Exposure, as elected and configured by a Member
or its clearing firm, has exceeded the pre-determined limit, IEX will
automatically reject new orders and cancel all open orders for the
applicable MPID(s) and/or FIX session specified. However, just as with
the existing Gross Notional Exposure risk control, the proposed new Net
Notional Exposure risk control may be increased or decreased on an
intra-day basis by a Member or the clearing firm of a Member, as
applicable. As specified in the proposed new paragraph (a)(2)(B) of
Rule 11.380, Net Notional Exposure will be calculated as the absolute
net sum of the notional value of all buy and sell trades (i.e., equal
to the value of executed buys minus the absolute value of executed long
sells minus the absolute value of executed short sells). Netting will
be calculated across all symbols. And, as with Gross Notional Exposure
risk controls, the proposed Net Notional Exposure risk control would
reset for each new trading day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See e.g., Nasdaq Stock Market (``Nasdaq'') Rule 6130; Cboe
BZX Exchange, Inc. (``Cboe'') Rule 11.13 Interpretations and
Policies .01(h); see also New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'')
Technology FAQ and Best Practices: Equities (November 2019) Section
5.7, available at https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/nyse/NYSE_Group_Equities_Technology_FAQ.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the proposed rule change, Members or their clearing firms, if
they choose to avail themselves of IEX's ARC mechanism, may elect to
configure the ARC mechanism to accumulate and specify a limit or limits
on either the Gross Notional Exposure, the newly-offered Net Notional
Exposure, or both (collectively defined in the proposed new rule as the
``ARC Limit'').\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ In the case of a Member that is subject to ARC Limits set
by its clearing firm, the Member will be advised of such limits by
IEX. In the event a Member that is subject to ARC Limits set by its
clearing firm also elects to set ARC Limits for its own trading, the
Exchange will apply both such limits with the lower of the ARC
Limits being applicable since it will trigger first.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    IEX believes that adding a Net Notional Exposure risk control to
its existing ARC mechanism will enhance the risk management tools
available to IEX Members. The Exchange notes, however, that use of an
ARC Limit by a Member or the clearing firm of a Member does not
automatically constitute compliance with IEX rules or SEC rules, nor
does it replace Member-managed and clearing firm-managed risk
management solutions. The Exchange does not propose to require Members
or their clearing firms to use the ARC mechanism, and Members and their
clearing firms may use any other appropriate risk-management tool or
service instead of, or in combination with, IEX's ARC mechanism. The
Exchange will not provide preferential treatment to Members or clearing
firms using IEX's ARC mechanism, nor will the use of the ARC mechanism
impact a Member's or clearing firm's use of IEX other than when it
results in orders being rejected or cancelled pursuant to the ARC
Limit. In addition, IEX will continue to provide the ARC mechanism to
Members and clearing firms without charge.
2. Statutory Basis
    IEX believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Sections 6(b) \11\ of the Act in general, and furthers
the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) \12\ of the Act, in particular, in
that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, 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 by enhancing the risk management protections available
to Exchange Members and their clearing firms. The Exchange believes
that the proposed rule change supports these objectives because it is
designed to enable all IEX Members an additional option for how to
manage and limit their own trading exposure (whether on the basis of
the Member's Gross Notional Exposure, Net Notional Exposure, or both)
on IEX, in addition to enabling clearing firms an additional option to
monitor their correspondent Members' trading exposure as well as their
own trading exposure (whether on the basis of the clearing firm's Gross
Notional Exposure, Net Notional Exposure, or both), including by intra-
day increases or decreases in the limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Further, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest
because it provides an additional mechanism to enable IEX Members and
clearing firms of IEX Members to manage their risk by preventing
trading that exceeds a Member's, or clearing firm of a Member's,
financial resources on a net notional basis (as well as the currently
available gross notional basis risk control), and thereby contributes
to the stability of the equities markets. Thus, the Exchange believes
the addition of a Net Notional Exposure risk control offers Members and
their clearing firms an important compliance tool that Members and
their clearing firms may use to help maintain the regulatory integrity
of the markets.
    The Exchange notes that other exchanges' rules provide for similar
functionality, as discussed in the Purpose section, and accordingly IEX
does not believe that the proposed rule change raises any new or novel
issues not already considered by the Commission.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See supra note 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent
with just and equitable principles of trade and not unfairly
discriminatory because the ARC mechanism is available to all IEX
Members and their clearing firms without charge.

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

    IEX 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. The
proposal is designed to expand the Exchange's existing, optional, ARC
mechanism by adding a new Net Notional Exposure risk control as
described in the Purpose section. The Exchange is not proposing to
charge any fee for use of any aspect of its ARC mechanism, which as
proposed, is available to all Members and clearing firms of Members
without charge. The Exchange does not believe the proposed rule change
will impose any burden on intermarket competition because other
exchanges offer similar functionality.\14\ The Exchange also does not
believe that the proposal will impose an burden on intramarket
competition because it is available to all Members, and clearing firms
of Members, and provides a mechanism to enable IEX Members and clearing
firms to manage their risk by preventing trading that is erroneous or
exceeds a Member's or clearing firm's financial resources, thereby
contributing to the stability of the equities markets. Accordingly, the
Exchange does not believe that this proposal will have any impact on
competition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See supra note 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor 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)(iii) of the Act \15\ and
subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-IEX-2019-13 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-IEX-2019-13. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-IEX-2019-13 and should be submitted on
or before December 30, 2019.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-26409 Filed 12-6-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: September 19, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 181)]
[Notices]
[Page 53549-53550]
[DOCID:fr19se07-58]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

 Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline, LP (Docket Nos. CP07-441-000,
CP07-442-000, and CP07-443-000) and Jordan Cove Energy Project, L.P.
(Docket No. CP07-444-000); Notice of Application for Certificate of
Public Convenience and Necessity and Section 3 Authorization

September 13, 2007.
    Take notice that on September 4, 2007, Pacific Connector Gas
Pipeline, LP, 295 Chipeta Way, Salt Lake City, Utah 84108, filed in
Docket Nos. CP07-441-000, CP07-442-000, and CP07-443-000, an
application under section 7 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and Parts 157
and 284 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission)
regulations for, respectively, a certificate of public convenience and
necessity authorizing the construction and operation of the Pacific
Connector Gas Pipeline (Pacific Connector); a blanket certificate to
perform certain routine activities and operations; and a blanket
certificate to provide open access firm transportation services. The
proposed pipeline is approximately 230-miles long and 36 inches in
diameter which will transport up to 1 Billion cubic feet (Bcf) per day
of regasified liquefied natural gas (LNG) from the Jordan Cove Energy
Project, L.P.'s Jordan Cove LNG Import Terminal (Jordan Cove LNG) in
Coos County, Oregon to interconnects with Northwest Pipeline Company in
Douglas County, Oregon, Avista Corporation in Jackson County, Oregon
and with Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Gas Transmission Northwest
Corporation and Tuscarora Gas Transmission Company at the terminus of
the system in Klamath County, Oregon.
    Also take notice that on September 4, 2007, Jordan Cove Energy
Project, L.P., 125 Central Avenue, Suite 380, Coos Bay, Oregon 97402,
filed with the Commission, in Docket No. CP07-444-000, an application
under section 3 of the NGA and Part 153 of the Commission's regulations
for authorization to site, construct, and operate a liquefied natural
gas import terminal and associated storage facilities in Coos County,
Oregon, for the purpose of importing LNG into the United States.
    The Pacific Connector and Jordan Cove LNG projects are more fully
described as set forth in the applications that are on file with the
Commission and open to public inspection. The instant filings may be
also viewed on the Web at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary''

link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the
docket number field to access the document. For assistance, call (866)
208-3676 or TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>
    Any questions regarding the applications should be directed to:
Beth L. Webb, Dickstein Shapiro, LLP, 1825 Eye Street, NW., Washington,
DC 20006,<PHONE_NUMBER> for Jordan Cove LNG; and Teresa Silcox Torrey/
Lynn Dahlberg, Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline, LLC, P.O. Box 58900,
Salt Lake City, Utah 84158-0900,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    On May 1, 2006, the Commission staff granted Jordan Cove LNG's and
Pacific Connector's requests to utilize the Pre-Filing process and
assigned Docket No. PF06-25-000 to staff activities involving the
Jordan Cove LNG project and Docket No. PF06-26-000 to Pacific Connector
project. Now, as of the filing of the September 4, 2007 applications,
the Pre-Filing Process for these projects has ended. From this time
forward, these proceedings will be conducted in Docket Nos. CP07-441-
000, CP07-442-000, CP07-443 -000, and CP07-444-000 as noted in the
caption of this Notice.
    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9,
and to ensure compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act, 42
U.S.C. 4321-4347, the Commission staff will issue a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review within 90 days of the date of this Notice. The
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) for the proposal. The
Notice will also alert other agencies of the requirement to complete
necessary reviews and authorizations within 90 days of the

date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the below listed comment date, file with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a
motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or
385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person
obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by
the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all
documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must
submit 14 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a
copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only
parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders
in the proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project.
The Commission will consider these comments in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will
not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's
rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project
provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly
involved in the protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commenters will
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court
review of the Commission's final order.
    Motions to intervene, protests and comments may be filed
electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper; see, 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
under the ``e-Filing'' link. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings.
    Comment Date: October 4, 2007.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-18426 Filed 9-18-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 76 (Wednesday, April 20, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23304-23305]
[FR Doc No: 2016-09152]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0655]

Animal Generic Drug User Fee Act; Stakeholder Consultation
Meetings on the Animal Generic Drug User Fee Act Reauthorization;
Request for Notification of Stakeholder Intention To Participate

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice; request for notification of participation.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is issuing
this notice to request that public stakeholders notify FDA of their
intent to participate in periodic consultation meetings on
reauthorization of the Animal Generic Drug User Fee Act (AGDUFA). The
statutory authority for AGDUFA expires September 30, 2018. The Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) requires that FDA consult
with a range of stakeholders--including patient and consumer advocacy
groups, veterinary professionals, and scientific and academic experts--
in developing recommendations for the next AGDUFA program, and hold
discussions with these stakeholders at least once every 4 months during
FDA's negotiations with the regulated industry. The purpose of this
request for notification is to ensure continuity and progress in these
regular discussions by establishing consistent stakeholder
representation.

DATES: Submit notification of intention to participate in continued
periodic stakeholder consultation meetings regarding AGDUFA
reauthorization by May 16, 2016. These stakeholder meetings are
expected to commence in June/July 2016 and will continue at least once
every 4 months during reauthorization negotiations with the regulated
industry. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further
information regarding notification of intention to participate.

ADDRESSES: The stakeholder meetings will be held at the Food and Drug
Administration, Center for Veterinary Medicine, 7519 Standish Pl.,
Rockville, MD 20855.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cassie Ravo, Center for Veterinary
Medicine, Food and Drug Administration, 7519 Standish Pl., Rockville,
MD 20855,<PHONE_NUMBER>, FAX:<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Introduction

    In 2013 Congress passed the Animal Generic Drug User Fee Amendments
of 2013 (Pub. L. 113-14; AGDUFA II). The authority for AGDUFA II
expires September 30, 2018. Without new legislation to reauthorize the
program, FDA will no longer be able to collect user fees for future
fiscal years to fund the generic new animal drug review process.
Section 742(d)(1) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 379j-22(d)(1)) requires
that FDA consult with a range of stakeholders in developing
recommendations for consideration for the next AGDUFA program,
including representatives from patient and consumer advocacy groups,
veterinary professionals, and scientific and academic experts. To
initiate this process of consultation, elsewhere in this issue of the
Federal Register, we are announcing a public meeting to be held on May
16, 2016, where stakeholders and other members of the public will be
given an opportunity to present their views on the reauthorization. The
meeting and written comments submitted to the docket will provide
critical input as the Agency prepares for reauthorization discussions.
Section 742(d)(3) of the FD&C Act further requires that FDA continue
meeting with these stakeholders at least once every 4 months during
negotiations with the regulated industry to continue discussions of
their views on the reauthorization, including suggested changes to the
AGDUFA program.
    FDA is issuing this Federal Register notice to request that
stakeholders--including veterinary, patient and consumer groups, as
well as scientific and academic experts--notify FDA of their intent to
participate in the periodic consultation meetings on AGDUFA
reauthorization. FDA believes that consistent stakeholder
representation at these meetings will be important to ensure progress
in these discussions. If you wish to participate in this part of the
reauthorization process, please designate one or more representatives
from your organization who will commit to attending these meetings and
preparing for the discussions. Stakeholders who identify themselves
through this notice will be included in all future stakeholder
discussion while FDA negotiates with the regulated industry. If a
stakeholder decides to participate in these meetings at a later time,
they may still participate in remaining meetings by notifying FDA (see
ADDRESSES). These stakeholder discussions will satisfy the requirement
in section 742(d)(3) of the FD&C Act.

II. Notification of Intent To Participate in Periodic Stakeholder
Consultation Meetings

    If you intend to participate in continued periodic stakeholder
consultation meetings regarding AGDUFA reauthorization, please submit
notification by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>by May 16, 2016. Your
email should contain complete contact information for each attendee,
including name, title, affiliation, address, email address, telephone
number, and notice of any special accommodations required due to a
disability. Stakeholders will receive confirmation and additional
information about the first meeting after FDA receives this
notification.

    Dated: April 12, 2016.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2016-09152 Filed 4-19-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 228 (Tuesday, November 29, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 73366]
[FR Doc No: 2022-26044]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-96380; File No. SR-CBOE-2022-051]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Designation of Longer Period for Commission Action on a Proposed Rule
Change To Amend Rules Relating to the Processing of Auction Responses

November 23, 2022.
    On October 3, 2022, Cboe Exchange, Inc. filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (the ``Commission''), pursuant to section
19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act''),\1\ and
Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to amend its rules
relating to the processing of auction responses. The proposed rule
change was published for comment in the Federal Register on October 20,
2022.\3\ The Commission has received no comment letters on the proposed
rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 96081 (October 14,
2022), 87 FR 63830.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act \4\ provides that, within 45 days of
the publication of notice of the filing of a proposed rule change, or
within such longer period up to 90 days as the Commission may designate
if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its
reasons for so finding or as to which the self-regulatory organization
consents, the Commission shall either approve the proposed rule change,
disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. The
45th day after publication of the notice for this proposed rule change
is December 4, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission is extending the 45-day time period for Commission
action on the proposed rule change. The Commission finds that it is
appropriate to designate a longer period within which to take action on
the proposed rule change so that it has sufficient time to consider the
proposed rule change. Accordingly, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\5\ the Commission designates January 18, 2023 as the date by which
the Commission shall either approve or disapprove, or institute
proceedings to determine whether to disapprove, the proposed rule
change (File No. SR-CBOE-2022-051).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Id.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(31).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-26044 Filed 11-28-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US

06/19/2007 06:22 PM

To

<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS> cc

<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>Janet McDonald/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Tricia Crabtree/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Subject

Fw: Pdf compare version of II.B.1-2, O3 draft NPR

Here's the risk assessment section for the primary standard.

----- Forwarded by Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US on 06/19/2007 06:21 PM -----

Harvey Richmond/RTP/USEPA/US

06/19/2007 06:19 PM

To

Karen Martin/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

cc

Dave Mckee/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Susan Stone/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, John Hannon/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, anderson.lea@epamail.epa.gov@EPA, John Langstaff/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, graham.stephen@epa.gov@EPA

Subject

Re: Pdf compare version of II.B.1-2, O3 draft NPR

Here's the pdf version of II.B.1-2 that is ready to go to OMB.

Harvey

    Harvey M. Richmond

    Ambient Standards Group

    Health and Environmental Impacts Division

    U.S. EPA

    C504-06

    RTP, NC  27711

    (office)<PHONE_NUMBER>

    (fax)<PHONE_NUMBER>

    (email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 208 (Wednesday, October 28, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65990-65991]
[FR Doc No: 2015-27409]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #2

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

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2265-001.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Compliance filing: Compliance filing Regarding Trading
Hubs and Resource Hubs to be effective 9/23/2015.
    Filed Date: 10/22/15.
    Accession Number: 20151022-5195.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/12/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-126-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Petition for Waiver of Tariff Provisions and Motion
for Expedited Action and Shortened Comment Period of Southwest Power
Pool, Inc.
    Filed Date: 10/20/15.
    Accession Number: 20151020-5261.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/30/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-136-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Notice of Cancellation of WMPA
No. 3253, Queue No. W4-053 to be effective 10/22/2015.
    Filed Date: 10/22/15.
    Accession Number: 20151022-5145.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/12/15.

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

    Dated: October 22, 2015.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-27409 Filed 10-27-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P