[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 92 (Monday, May 15, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 22294-22296]
[FR Doc No: 2017-09386]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 171

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0183; FRL-9962-31]
RIN 2070-AK38

Pesticides; Certification of Pesticide Applicators Rule;
Extension of Effective Date

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: On January 4, 2017, EPA published a final rule revising the
regulation concerning the certification of applicators of restricted
use pesticides (RUPs). The original effective date of March 6, 2017 was
extended to March 21, 2017 by rule issued January 26, 2017, and
subsequently extended to May 22, 2017 by rule issued March 20, 2017. In
accordance with the Presidential directives as expressed in the
memorandum of January 20, 2017, from the Assistant to the President and
Chief of Staff, entitled ``Regulatory Freeze Pending Review,'' and the
principles identified in the April 25, 2017 Executive Order ``Promoting
Agriculture and Rural Prosperity in America,'' EPA is proposing to
further delay the effective date of the January 4, 2017 revisions to
the Certification of Pesticide Applicators rule until May 22, 2018.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 19, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0183, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC) (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460-0001. In addition, please mail a copy of your comments on the
information collection provisions to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, ATTN: Desk Officer
for EPA, 725 17th St. NW., Washington, DC 20503.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, are available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kevin Keaney, Field and External
Affairs Division (7506P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

    On January 26, 2017, EPA published a final rule in the Federal
Register entitled ``Delay of Effective Date for 30 Final Regulations
Published by the Environmental Protection Agency Between October 28,
2016 and January 17, 2017'' (82 FR 8499). In that rule, EPA delayed the
effective dates of the five regulations, including the final rule
revising the regulation concerning the certification of applicators of
restricted use pesticides (RUPs) issued on January 4, 2017 (82 FR 952)
(FR-9956-70), as requested in the memorandum of January 20, 2017, from
the Assistant to the President and Chief of Staff, entitled
``Regulatory Freeze Pending Review'' (January 20 Memorandum). The
January 20 Memorandum directed the heads of Executive Departments and
Agencies to postpone for 60 days from the date of the January 20
Memorandum the effective dates of all regulations that had been
published in the Federal Register but had not yet taken effect.
    The January 20 Memorandum further directed that where appropriate
and as permitted by applicable law, agencies should consider a rule to
delay the effective date for regulations beyond that 60-day period.
Accordingly, on March 20, 2017, EPA published the final rule ``Further
Delay of Effective Dates for Five Final Regulations Published by the
Environmental Protection Agency Between December 12, 2016 and January
17, 2017'' (82 FR 14324), which applied to the revised Certification of
Pesticide Applicators rule and four other rules. Pursuant to that March
20, 2017 rule, the effective date of the revised Certification of
Pesticide Applicators rule was extended to May 22, 2017.
    Upon further review, EPA has determined that the effective date of
the revised Certification of Pesticide Applicators rule should be
extended until May 22, 2018. EPA is taking this action to give recently
arrived Agency officials the opportunity to conduct a substantive
review of the revised Certification of Pesticide Applicators rule.
    In view of the imminence of the revised Certification of Pesticide
Applicators rule's May 22, 2017 effective date, EPA is reducing the
duration of the comment period specified in 5 U.S.C. 553(d) to five
days. EPA believes that five days is adequate time for interested
parties to express their views on the whether the effective date of the
revised Certification of Pesticide Applicators rule should be extended
to allow substantive review. During this one-year extension, state
certifying authorities and certified commercial and private applicators
would be relieved of restrictions and burdens that would otherwise be
imposed by the January 4, 2017 revisions to the Certification of
Pesticide Applicators rule. Because this request for comments relieves
a restriction, it is eligible for the exemption in 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1)
allowing a reduced comment period.
    EPA's decision to shorten the comment period is also based on the
good cause exception in 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). The Agency has determined
that a full 30-day comment period is impracticable, unnecessary and
contrary to the public interest. EPA has determined a substantive
review of the revised Certification of Pesticide Applicators rule is
appropriate and consistent with the principles identified in the April
25, 2017 Executive Order ``Promoting Agriculture and Rural Prosperity
in America''. Given that a 30-day comment period would extend beyond
the Certification of Pesticide Applicators rule's May 22, 2017
effective date, such a 30-day comment would be impractical and contrary
to the public interest in that it would require states, tribes, and the
regulated community to adopt new measures to comply with a regulation
that the Agency intends to substantively review, and possibly revise.
    For the foregoing reasons, the EPA relies on the exceptions in 5
U.S.C. 553(d)(1) and (3) to issue this document with a five-day comment
period.

II. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review; and,
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is not a significant regulatory action as that term is
defined in Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993).
Accordingly, this request for comments is not subject to requirements
of E.O. 12866 that apply to significant regulatory actions.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This request for comments does not involve any information
collection activities subject to the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under RFA, 5 U.S.C.
601 et seq.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain an unfunded mandate of $100 million or
more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not
significantly or uniquely affect small governments.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). It will not have
substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have Tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

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

    This request for comments is not subject to Executive Order 13045
(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) because it is not an economically
significant regulatory action as defined by Executive Order 12866.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355,
May 22, 2001), because it is not a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards that would
require Agency consideration under NTTAA section 12(d), 15 U.S.C. 272
note.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    EPA believes that this action would not have disproportionately
high and

adverse human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income,
or indigenous populations, as specified in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR
7629, February 16, 1994).

    Dated: May 4, 2017.
E. Scott Pruitt,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2017-09386 Filed 5-11-17; 11:15 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 95 (Wednesday, May 19, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27092-27093]
[FR Doc No: 2021-10552]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket Nos. FDA-2020-P-2244 and FDA-2020-P-2245]

Determination That ISOPTIN (Verapamil Hydrochloride) Tablets 40
Milligrams, 80 Milligrams, and 120 Milligrams, and CALAN (Verapamil
Hydrochloride) Tablets, 40 Milligrams, 80 Milligrams, 120 Milligrams,
and 160 Milligrams, Were Not Withdrawn From Sale for Reasons of Safety
or Effectiveness

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA, Agency, or we) has
determined that ISOPTIN (verapamil hydrochloride) tablets, 40
milligrams (mg), 80 mg, and 120 mg, and CALAN (verapamil hydrochloride)
tablets, 40 mg, 80 mg, 120 mg, and 160 mg, were not withdrawn from sale
for reasons of safety or effectiveness. This determination will allow
FDA to approve abbreviated new drug applications (ANDAs) for ISOPTIN
(verapamil hydrochloride) tablets, 40 mg, 80 mg, and 120 mg, and CALAN
(verapamil hydrochloride) tablets, 40 mg, 80 mg, 120 mg, and 160 mg, if
all other legal and regulatory requirements are met.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nikki Mueller, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, Rm. 6280, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-
796-3601<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 1984, Congress enacted the Drug Price
Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 (Pub. L. 98-417)
(the 1984 amendments), which authorized the approval of duplicate
versions of drug products under an ANDA procedure. ANDA applicants
must, with certain exceptions, show that the drug for which they are
seeking approval contains the same active ingredient in the same
strength and dosage form as the ``listed drug,'' which is a version of
the drug that was previously approved. ANDA applicants do not have to
repeat the extensive clinical testing otherwise necessary to gain
approval of a new drug application (NDA).
    The 1984 amendments include what is now section 505(j)(7) of the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 355(j)(7)), which
requires FDA to publish a list of all approved drugs. FDA publishes
this list as part of the ``Approved Drug Products With Therapeutic
Equivalence Evaluations,'' which is known generally as the ``Orange
Book.'' Under FDA regulations, drugs are removed from the list if the
Agency withdraws or suspends approval of the drug's NDA or ANDA for
reasons of safety or effectiveness or if FDA determines that the listed
drug was withdrawn from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness (21
CFR 314.162).
    A person may petition the Agency to determine, or the Agency may
determine on its own initiative, whether a listed drug was withdrawn
from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness. This determination
may be made at any time after the drug has been withdrawn from sale,
but must be made prior to approving an ANDA that refers to the listed
drug (Sec.  314.161 (21 CFR 314.161)). FDA may not approve an ANDA that
does not refer to a listed drug.
    ISOPTIN (verapamil hydrochloride) tablets, 40 mg, 80 mg, and 120
mg, are the subject of NDA 018593, held by Mt. Adams Technologies, LLC,
and initially approved on March 8, 1982. CALAN (verapamil
hydrochloride) tablets, 40 mg, 80 mg, 120 mg, and 160 mg, are the
subject of NDA 018817, held by Pfizer Inc., and initially approved on
September 10, 1984. ISOPTIN and CALAN are indicated for the treatment
of angina, arrythmias, and essential hypertension.
    Center Laboratories, Inc., submitted two citizen petitions dated
November 30, 2020 (Docket Nos. FDA-2020-P-2244 and FDA-2020-P-2245),
under 21 CFR 10.30, requesting that the Agency determine whether
ISOPTIN (verapamil hydrochloride) tablets, 40 mg, 80 mg,

and 120 mg, and CALAN (verapamil hydrochloride) tablets, 40 mg, 80 mg,
120 mg, and 160 mg, were withdrawn from sale for reasons of safety or
effectiveness.
    After considering the citizen petitions and reviewing Agency
records and based on the information we have at this time, FDA has
determined under Sec.  314.161 that ISOPTIN (verapamil hydrochloride)
tablets, 40 mg, 80 mg, and 120 mg, and CALAN (verapamil hydrochloride)
tablets, 40 mg, 80 mg, 120 mg, and 160 mg, were not withdrawn for
reasons of safety or effectiveness. The petitioner has identified no
data or other information suggesting that ISOPTIN (verapamil
hydrochloride) tablets, 40 mg, 80 mg, and 120 mg, and CALAN (verapamil
hydrochloride) tablets, 40 mg, 80 mg, 120 mg, and 160 mg, were
withdrawn for reasons of safety or effectiveness. We have carefully
reviewed our files for records concerning the withdrawal of ISOPTIN
(verapamil hydrochloride) tablets, 40 mg, 80 mg, and 120 mg, and CALAN
(verapamil hydrochloride) tablets, 40 mg, 80 mg, 120 mg, and 160 mg,
from sale. We have also independently evaluated relevant literature and
data for possible postmarketing adverse events. We have reviewed the
available evidence and determined that these drug products were not
withdrawn from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness.
    Accordingly, the Agency will continue to list ISOPTIN (verapamil
hydrochloride) tablets, 40 mg, 80 mg, and 120 mg, and CALAN (verapamil
hydrochloride) tablets, 40 mg, 80 mg, 120 mg, and 160 mg, in the
``Discontinued Drug Product List'' section of the Orange Book. The
``Discontinued Drug Product List'' delineates, among other items, drug
products that have been discontinued from marketing for reasons other
than safety or effectiveness. ANDAs that refer to ISOPTIN (verapamil
hydrochloride) tablets, 40 mg, 80 mg, and 120 mg, and CALAN (verapamil
hydrochloride) tablets, 40 mg, 80 mg, 120 mg, and 160 mg, may be
approved by the Agency as long as they meet all other legal and
regulatory requirements for the approval of ANDAs. If FDA determines
that labeling for these drug products should be revised to meet current
standards, the Agency will advise ANDA applicants to submit such
labeling.

    Dated: May 7, 2021.
Lauren K. Roth,
Acting Principal Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2021-10552 Filed 5-18-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 113 (Monday, June 13, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34290-34291]
[FR Doc No: 2011-14464]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[U.S. DOT Docket No. NHTSA-2011-0068]

Reports, Forms, and Record Keeping Requirements

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.

ACTION: Request for public comment on proposed collection of
information.

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

SUMMARY: Before a Federal agency can collect certain information from
the public, it must receive approval from the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB). Under procedures established by the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, before seeking OMB approval, Federal agencies must solicit
public comment on proposed collections of information, including
extensions and reinstatements of previously approved collections.
    This document describes the collection of information for which
NHTSA intends to seek OMB approval.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 12, 2011.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by DOT Docket ID Number
NHTSA-2011-0068 using any of the following methods:
    Electronic submissions: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the online instructions for submitting comments.
    Mail: Docket Management Facility, M-30, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building Ground
Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590.
    Hand Delivery: 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.
    Instructions: Each submission must include the Agency name and the
Docket number for this Notice. Note that all comments received will be
posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov including any
personal information provided.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Alan Block, Contracting Officer's
Technical Representative, Office of Behavioral Safety Research (NTI-
131), National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., W46-499, Washington, DC 20590. Mr. Block's phone number is
202-366-6401 and his e-mail address is<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
before an agency submits a proposed collection of information to OMB
for approval, it must publish a document in the Federal Register
providing a 60-day comment period and otherwise consult with members of
the public and affected agencies concerning each proposed collection of
information. The OMB has promulgated regulations describing what must
be included in such a document. Under OMB's regulations (at 5 CFR
1320.8(d)), an agency must ask for public comment on the following:
    (I) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for
the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including
whether the information will have practical utility;
    (ii) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used;
    (iii) How to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and
    (iv) How to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses.
    In compliance with these requirements, NHTSA asks public comment on
the following proposed collection of information:

The National Survey of Pedestrian and Bicyclist Attitudes, Knowledge,
and Behaviors

    Type of Request--New information collection requirement.
    OMB Clearance Number--None.
    Form Number--NHTSA Form 1148.
    Requested Expiration Date of Approval--3 years from date of
approval.
    Summary of the Collection of Information--The National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) proposes to collect information
from the public to ascertain the scope and magnitude of bicycle and
pedestrian activity and the public's behavior and attitudes regarding
bicycling and walking. A national telephone survey will be administered
to 9,000 randomly selected respondents drawn from all 50 States and the
District of Columbia. The national survey will be preceded by a pretest
administered to 15 respondents. The survey will ask about the
characteristics of bicycling and walking trips, conspicuity, community
design for bicycling and walking, bicycle helmet use, and general
opinions about bicycling and walking. Interview length will average 20
minutes.
    In conducting the proposed telephone interviews, the interviewers
would use computer-assisted telephone interviewing to reduce interview
length and minimize recording errors. No personally identifiable
information will be collected during the telephone interviews.

    Description of the Need for the Information and Proposed Use of the
Information--NHTSA was established to reduce the number of deaths,
injuries, and economic losses resulting from motor vehicle crashes on
the Nation's highways. As part of this statutory mandate, NHTSA is
authorized to conduct research as a foundation for the development of
motor vehicle standards and traffic safety programs.
    Pedestrian safety and bicyclist safety are two of several
behavioral areas for which NHTSA has developed comprehensive programs
to meet its injury reduction goals. The major components of pedestrian
safety programs are education, enforcement, and outreach. Those three
approaches are also applied to bicyclist safety programs, with
legislative efforts added to the mix.
    NHTSA encourages bicycling as an alternate mode of transportation
to motor vehicle travel. Moreover, increasing safe bicycling and
walking behavior is promoted as a positive contributor to the quality
of life. But an increase in these behaviors often means an increase in
exposure to potential risk of collision with motor vehicles,
underscoring the need to have in place aggressive pedestrian and
bicyclist safety programs to keep injuries on a downward trajectory.
This in turn requires periodic data collection to assess whether the
programs continue to be responsive to the public's information needs,
behavioral intentions, attitudes, physical environment, and other
factors that contribute to safety while walking or bicycling.
    A survey of pedestrian and bicyclist attitudes and behavior was
conducted in 2002. That survey provided program planners and community
leaders with detailed information on walking and bicycling behavior,
level of support for facilities assisting those activities, and
awareness of safety issues. But the information is in need of updating,
especially given recent programs and initiatives to increase walking
and bicycling. This project will provide that update by conducting the
2012 National Survey of Bicyclist and Pedestrian Attitudes and
Behavior.
    NHTSA will use the findings from this proposed collection of
information to assist States, localities, and communities in developing
and refining bicycling and walking safety programs.
    Description of the Likely Respondents (Including Estimated Number,
and Proposed Frequency of Response to the Collection of Information)--
Under this proposed effort, the Contractor would conduct 15 pretest
telephone interviews and 9,000 national survey telephone interviews for
a total of 9,015 interviews. The telephone interviews will be conducted
with respondents age 16 and older, with over-sampling of respondents 16
through 39. Interview length will average 20 minutes. Interviews would
be conducted with respondents at residential phone numbers selected
through random digit dialing. Interviews would be conducted both with
respondents using landline phones and respondents using cell phones.
Businesses are ineligible for the sample and would not be interviewed.
All respondents will be administered the survey one time only.
    Estimate of the Total Annual Reporting and Record Keeping Burden
Resulting from the Collection of Information--NHTSA estimates that
respondents would require an average of 20 minutes to complete the
telephone interviews or a total of 3,005 hours for the 9,015
respondents. All interviewing would occur during a two-to-three month
period during 2012. Thus the annual reporting burden would be the
entire 3,005 hours. The respondents would not incur any reporting cost
from the information collection. The respondents also would not incur
any record keeping burden or record keeping cost from the information
collection.

    Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A).

Jeffrey Michael,
Associate Administrator, Research and Program Development.
[FR Doc. 2011-14464 Filed 6-10-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 103 (Tuesday, May 29, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24533-24534]
[FR Doc No: 2018-11499]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-83309; File No. SR-BOX-2018-19]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BOX Options Exchange LLC; Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To
Amend the Fee Schedule on the BOX Market LLC (``BOX'') Options Facility
To Amend Drop Copy Port Fees

May 23, 2018.
    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 May 16, 2018, BOX Options Exchange LLC (the ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which
Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange filed the
proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act,\3\
and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposal
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)(ii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange is filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') a proposed rule change to amend the Fee Schedule t
[sic] on the BOX Market LLC (``BOX'') options facility. The text of the
proposed rule change is available from the principal office of the
Exchange, at the Commission's Public Reference Room and also on the
Exchange's internet website at http://boxexchange.com.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Section VI.B.3 (Drop Copy) of the
BOX Fee Schedule. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to add language
that states that drop copy fees will be capped at $2,000 per month. The
Exchange notes that BOX will continue to assess Drop Copy Port Fees of
$500 per port per month for each month a Participant is credentialed to
use a Drop Copy Port, subject to the $2,000 cap.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ BOX Participants connected to a port as of the last trading
day of each calendar month will be charged the applicable port fee
for that month.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with the
requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act, in general, and Section
6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5)of the Act,\6\ in particular, in that it provides
for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other
charges among BOX Participants and other persons using its facilities
and does not unfairly discriminate between customers, issuers, brokers
or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed drop copy fee cap is
reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory. The Exchange
recently established Port Fees for Participants.\7\ BOX Participants
are currently charged $500 per port per month for each month a
Participant is credentialed to use a Drop Copy Port. After further
review, the Exchange now proposes to cap Drop Copy Port Fees at $2,000
per month. The purpose of this change is due to the different
technology architecture used by various BOX Participants.\8\ Further,
BOX believes that the proposed change is reasonable as other options
exchanges have similar fee caps.\9\ Lastly, the Exchange believes that
the proposed change is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory
because the fee cap will apply to all BOX Participants, regardless of
account type.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83197 (May 9, 2018),
83 FR 22567 (May 15, 2018)(SR-BOX-2018-15).
    \8\ The Exchange notes that some Participants are impacted
differently by the current Drop Copy Port Fee because of the number
of legacy connections to the Drop Copy Port. As such, the Exchange
is proposing the fee cap in order to avoid significant fees for
certain Participants due to these connections.
    \9\ See Nasdaq BX, Inc. (``BX'') Fee Schedule. BX charges $500
per port, per month for their FIX Drop Port, but caps their monthly
fees in the aggregate for their Ports (including FIX Port, CTI Port,
FIX DROP Port, BX Depth Port and BX TOP Port) at $7,500 per month.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Instead the proposed change
will allow the Exchange to not impose significant costs for
Participants with legacy drop copy connections. Further, the Exchange
does not believe that capping the Drop Copy Port Fees will impose an
undue burden on intra-market competition because all Participants are
eligible for the fee cap.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Exchange Act \10\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2)
thereunder,\11\ because it establishes or changes a due, or fee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-BOX-2018-19 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-BOX-2018-19. 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 such filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-BOX-2018-19, and should be submitted on
or before June 19, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-11499 Filed 5-25-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 200 (Tuesday, October 18, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 63022]
[FR Doc No: 2022-22577]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 271

[EPA-R03-RCRA-2022-0351; FRL-9947-01-R3]

Virginia: Final Authorization of State Hazardous Waste Management
Program Revisions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Commonwealth of Virginia has applied to Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) for final authorization of revisions to its
hazardous waste program under the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA). By this action, EPA proposes to grant final authorization
to Virginia. In the ``Rules and Regulations'' section of this issue of
the Federal Register, EPA is authorizing the revisions by a direct
final rule. EPA did not make a proposal prior to the direct final rule
because EPA believes this action is not controversial and does not
expect comments that oppose it. EPA has explained the reasons for this
authorization in the preamble to the direct final rule. Unless EPA
receives written adverse comments pertaining to this State revision
during the comment period, the direct final rule will become effective
on the date it establishes, and EPA will not take further action on
this proposed rulemaking. However, if EPA receives adverse comments
pertaining to this State revision, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal
in the Federal Register and the direct final rule will not take effect.
EPA will then respond to public comments in a later final rule based on
this proposed rulemaking. You may not have another opportunity for
comment. If you want to comment on this action, you must do so at this
time.

DATES: Send written comments by November 17, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R03-
RCRA-2022-0351, at www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online instructions
for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or
removed from www.regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment
received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information the disclosure of which is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA
public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions,
and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
    The EPA encourages electronic submittals, but if you are unable to
submit electronically or need other assistance, please contact
Jacqueline Morrison, the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT provision below. Please also contact Jacqueline Morrison if you
need assistance in a language other than English or if you are a person
with disabilities who needs a reasonable accommodation at no cost to
you.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jacqueline Morrison, RCRA Programs
Branch; Land, Chemicals, and Redevelopment Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region 3, Four Penn Center, 1600 John F Kennedy Blvd.
(Mail code 3LD30), Philadelphia, PA 19103-2852; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>,
email: [email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has explained the reasons for this
action in the preamble to the direct final rule. For additional
information, see the direct final rule published in the ``Rules and
Regulations'' section of this issue of the Federal Register.

    Authority: This action is issued under the authority of sections
2002(a), 3006 and 7004(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6926, 6974(b).

Adam Ortiz,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region III.
[FR Doc. 2022-22577 Filed 10-17-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: January 14, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 9)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 2210-2211]
[DOCID:fr14ja08-26]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2007-1149; FRL-8515-5]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Virginia; Fredericksburg and Shenandoah National Park 8-Hour Ozone
Areas Movement from the Nonattainment Area List to the Maintenance Area
List

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve the State Implementation Plan
(SIP) revision submitted by the Commonwealth of Virginia for the
purpose of establishing the Fredericksburg 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment
Area (Spotsylvania County, Stafford County, and Fredericksburg City)
and the Shenandoah National Park 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area
(portions of the park located in Page and Madison Counties) movement
from the nonattainment area list to the maintenance area list. In the
Final Rules section of this Federal Register, EPA is approving the
Commonwealth's SIP submittal as a direct final rule without prior
proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial submittal
and anticipates no adverse comments. A detailed rationale for the
approval is set forth in the direct final rule. If no adverse comments
are received in response to this action, no further activity is
contemplated. If EPA receives adverse comments, the direct final rule
will be withdrawn and all public comments received will be addressed in
a subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. EPA will not
institute a second comment period. Any parties interested in commenting
on this action should do so at this time.

DATES: Comments must be received in writing by February 13, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2007-1149 by one of the following methods:
    A. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for

submitting comments.
    B. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2007-1149, Cristina Fernandez, Chief, Air
Quality Planning Branch, Mailcode 3AP21, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
    D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2007-1149. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online
at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,

unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail.

The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system,

which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through http://www.regulations.gov,

your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part
of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available
on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends
that you include your name and other contact information in the body of
your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read
your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the

http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some

information is not publicly available, i.e., 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 in http://www.regulations.gov or

in hard copy during normal business hours at the Air Protection
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch
Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State submittal
are available at the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, 629
East Main Street, Richmond, Virginia, 23219.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Melissa Linden,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For further information, please see the
information provided in the direct final action, Approval of Virginia's
Revision to move the Fredericksburg and the Shenandoah National Park 8-
Hour Ozone Areas from the list of Nonattainment Areas to the list of
Maintenance Areas that is located in the ``Rules and Regulations''
section of this Federal Register publication. Please note that if EPA
receives adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this
rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the
rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not
the subject of an adverse comment.

    Dated: December 27, 2007.
William T. Wisniewski,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
 [FR Doc. E8-290 Filed 1-11-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 89 (Tuesday, May 8, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20800-20801]
[FR Doc No: 2018-09712]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP18-6-000]

RH energytrans, LLC; Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review
of the Risberg Line Project

    On October 16, 2017, RH energytrans, LLC filed an application in
Docket No. CP18-6-000 requesting a Certificate of Public Convenience
and Necessity pursuant to section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act to
construct and operate certain natural gas pipeline facilities. The
proposed project is known as the Risberg Line Project (Project), and
would deliver up to 55,000 dekatherms per day of firm natural gas
transportation service to Dominion Energy Ohio and other prospective
customers.
    On October 26, 2017, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(Commission or FERC) issued its Notice of Application for the Project.
Among other things, that notice alerted agencies issuing federal
authorizations of the requirement to complete all necessary reviews and
to reach a final decision on a request for a federal authorization
within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's
Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Project. This instant notice
identifies the FERC staff's planned schedule for the completion of the
EA for the Project.

Schedule for Environmental Review

Issuance of EA--June 29, 2018
90-Day Federal Authorization Decision Deadline--September 27, 2018

    If a schedule change becomes necessary, additional notice will be
provided so that the relevant agencies are kept informed of the
Project's progress.

Project Description

    RH energytrans, LLC's Risberg Line Project would involve
modification and recertification of existing facilities and
installation of new facilities. Activities associated with the
modification and the recertification of existing facilities would
include:
     Modifications at the existing County Line Compressor
Station in Erie County, Pennsylvania;
     conversion of an existing 26.6-mile-long, 12-inch-diameter
gathering pipeline to natural gas transmission service in Crawford and
Erie Counties, Pennsylvania; and
     conversion of an existing 5.0-mile-long, 8-inch-diameter
gathering pipeline to natural gas transmission service in Erie County,
Pennsylvania.
    New facilities that RH energytrans, LLC proposes to construct
include:
     Meadville Compressor Station in Crawford County,
Pennsylvania, including one 728 horsepower natural gas-fired
reciprocating compressor unit;
     650-foot-long, 12-inch-diameter lateral pipeline within
the existing 12-inch-diameter gathering pipeline right-of-way;
     28.3-mile-long, 12-inch-diameter pipeline in Erie County,
Pennsylvania and Ashtabula County, Ohio (Risberg Pipeline); and
     North Kingsville Meter Station in Ashtabula County, Ohio.

Background

    On November 21, 2017, the Commission issued a Notice of Intent to
Prepare an Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Risberg Line
Project and Request for Comments on Environmental Issues (NOI). The NOI
was sent to affected landowners; federal, state, and local government
agencies; elected officials; environmental and public interest groups;
Native American tribes; other interested parties; and local libraries
and newspapers. In response to the NOI, the Commission received
comments from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ohio Department of
Natural Resources, and 29 individuals. A number of individuals
submitted more than one comment. The comments included a variety of
topics such as water resources, wetlands, vegetation, wildlife, land
use, recreation, and socioeconomics, air quality and noise, reliability
and safety, and alternatives.

    The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Pennsylvania Fish and Boat
Commission are cooperating agencies in the preparation of the EA.

Additional Information

    In order to receive notification of the issuance of the EA and to
keep track of all formal issuances and submittals in specific dockets,
the Commission offers a free service called eSubscription. This can
reduce the amount of time you spend researching proceedings by
automatically providing you with notification of these filings,
document summaries, and direct links to the documents. Go to
www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp.
    Additional information about the Project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs at (866) 208-FERC or on the
FERC website (www.ferc.gov). Using the eLibrary link, select General
Search from the eLibrary menu, enter the selected date range and Docket
Number excluding the last three digits (i.e., CP18-6-000), and follow
the instructions. For assistance with access to eLibrary, the helpline
can be reached at<PHONE_NUMBER>, TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>, or at
[email protected]. The eLibrary link on the FERC website also
provides access to the texts of formal documents issued by the
Commission, such as orders, notices, and rule makings.

    Dated: May 1, 2018.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-09712 Filed 5-7-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P