[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 102 (Friday, May 28, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 28921]
[FR Doc No: 2021-11502]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meetings

TIME AND DATE: Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of
the Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, that the
Securities and Exchange Commission Investor Advisory Committee will
hold a public meeting on Thursday, June 10, 2021. The meeting will
begin at 10:00 a.m. (ET) and will be open to the public.

PLACE: The meeting will be conducted by remote means and/or at the
Commission's headquarters, 100 F St NE, Washington, DC 20549. Members
of the public may watch the webcast of the meeting on the Commission's
website at www.sec.gov.

STATUS: This Sunshine Act notice is being issued because a majority of
the Commission may attend the meeting. On May 26, 2021, the Commission
published notice of the Committee meeting (Release Nos. 33-10944, 34-
92018), indicating that the meeting is open to the public and inviting
the public to submit written comments to the Committee.

MATTER TO BE CONSIDERED: The agenda for the meeting includes: Welcome
remarks; approval of previous meeting minutes; a panel discussion
regarding best execution and its role in post-NMS market structure; a
panel discussion regarding best execution issues unique to wholesale
brokers; a panel discussion regarding 10b5-1 plans; a discussion of a
recommendation regarding individual retirement accounts; subcommittee
reports; and a non-public administrative session.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: For further information and to
ascertain what, if any, matters have been added, deleted or postponed;
please contact Vanessa A. Countryman from the Office of the Secretary
at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: May 26, 2021.
Vanessa A. Countryman,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-11502 Filed 5-26-21; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 207 (Friday, October 27, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73912-73916]
[FR Doc No: 2023-23708]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-98787; File No. SR-CboeEDGX-2023-064]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To
Amend Its Fees Schedule Related to Physical Port Fees

October 23, 2023.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on October 13, 2023, Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``EDGX Options'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``EDGX Options'')
proposes to amend its Fees Schedule. The text of the proposed rule
change is provided in Exhibit 5.
    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's website (http://markets.cboe.com/us/options/regulation/rule_filings/edgx/), at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary, and at
the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the

places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries,
set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant
aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend its fee schedule for its equity
options platform (``EDGX Options'') relating to physical connectivity
fees.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Exchange initially filed the proposed fee changes on
July 3, 2023 (SR-CboeEDGX-2023-045). On September 1, 2023, the
Exchange withdrew that filing and submitted SR-CboeEDGX-2023-058. On
September 29, 2023, the Securities and Exchange Commission issued a
Suspension of and Order Instituting Proceedings to Determine whether
to Approve or Disapprove a Proposed Rule Change to Amend its Fees
Schedule Related to Physical Port Fees (the ``OIP''). On September
29, 2023, the Exchange filed the proposed fee change (SR-CboeEDGX-
2023-063). On October 13, 2023, the Exchange withdrew that filing
and submitted this filing. No comment letters were received in
connection with any of the foregoing rule filings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    By way of background, a physical port is utilized by a Member or
non-Member to connect to the Exchange at the data centers where the
Exchange's servers are located. The Exchange currently assesses the
following physical connectivity fees for Members and non-Members on a
monthly basis: $2,500 per physical port for a 1 gigabit (``Gb'')
circuit and $7,500 per physical port for a 10 Gb circuit. The Exchange
proposes to increase the monthly fee for 10 Gb physical ports from
$7,500 to $8,500 per port. The Exchange notes the proposed fee change
better enables it to continue to maintain and improve its market
technology and services and also notes that the proposed fee amount,
even as amended, continues to be in line with, or even lower than,
amounts assessed by other exchanges for similar connections.\4\ The
physical ports may also be used to access the Systems for the following
affiliate exchanges and only one monthly fee currently (and will
continue) to apply per port: the Exchange's equities platform (EDGX
Equities), Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (options and equities platforms),
Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc., Cboe EDGA Exchange, Inc., and Cboe C2
Exchange, Inc. (``Affiliate Exchanges'').\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See e.g., The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq''), General
8, Connectivity to the Exchange. Nasdaq and its affiliated exchanges
charge a monthly fee of $15,000 for each 10Gb Ultra fiber connection
to the respective exchange, which is analogous to the Exchange's
10Gb physical port. See also New York Stock Exchange LLC, NYSE
American LLC, NYSE Arca, Inc., NYSE Chicago Inc., NYSE National,
Inc. Connectivity Fee Schedule, which provides that 10 Gb LX LCN
Circuits (which are analogous to the Exchange's 10 Gb physical port)
are assessed $22,000 per month, per port.
    \5\ The Affiliate Exchanges are also submitting contemporaneous
identical rule filings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular,
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\6\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \7\ requirements that the rules of an exchange be
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing,
settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating
transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest. Additionally,
the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \8\ requirement that the rules of an exchange not be
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers. The Exchange also believes the proposed rule
change is consistent with Section 6(b)(4) \9\ of the Act, which
requires that Exchange rules provide for the equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its Members and other
persons using its facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \8\ Id.
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposed fee change is reasonable as it
reflects a moderate increase in physical connectivity fees for 10 Gb
physical ports. Further, the current 10 Gb physical port fee has
remained unchanged since June 2018.\10\ Since its last increase 5 years
ago however, there has been notable inflation. Particularly, the dollar
has had an average inflation rate of 3.9% per year between 2018 and
today, producing a cumulative price increase of approximately 21.1%
inflation since the fee for the 10 Gb physical port was last
modified.\11\ Moreover, the Exchange historically does not increase
fees every year, notwithstanding inflation. Accordingly, the Exchange
believes the proposed fee is reasonable as it represents only an
approximate 13% increase from the rates adopted five years ago,
notwithstanding the cumulative rate of 21.1%.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Securities and Exchange Release No. 83430 (June 14,
2018), 83 FR 28697 (June 20, 2018) (SR-CboeEDGX-2018-017).
    \11\ See https://www.officialdata.org/us/inflation/2010?amount=1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also believes the proposed fee is reasonable as it is
still in line with, or even lower than, amounts assessed by other
exchanges for similar connections.\12\ Indeed, the Exchange believes
assessing fees that are a lower rate than fees assessed by other
exchanges for analogous connectivity (which were similarly adopted via
the rule filing process and filed with the Commission) is reasonable.
As noted above, the proposed fee is also the same as is concurrently
being proposed for its Affiliate Exchanges. Further, Members are able
to utilize a single port to connect to any of the Affiliate Exchanges
with no additional fee assessed for that same physical port.
Particularly, the Exchange believes the proposed monthly per port fee
is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory as it is
assessed only once, even if it connects with another affiliate exchange
since only one port is being used and the Exchange does not wish to
charge multiple fees for the same port. Indeed, the Exchange notes that
several ports are in fact purchased and utilized across one or more of
the Exchange's affiliated Exchanges (and charged only once).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See e.g., The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq''), General
8, Connectivity to the Exchange. Nasdaq and its affiliated exchanges
charge a monthly fee of $15,000 for each 10Gb Ultra fiber connection
to the respective exchange, which is analogous to the Exchange's
10Gb physical port. See also New York Stock Exchange LLC, NYSE
American LLC, NYSE Arca, Inc., NYSE Chicago Inc., NYSE National,
Inc. Connectivity Fee Schedule, which provides that 10 Gb LX LCN
Circuits (which are analogous to the Exchange's 10 Gb physical port)
are assessed $22,000 per month, per port.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also believes that the proposed fee change is not
unfairly discriminatory because it would be assessed uniformly across
all market participants that purchase the physical ports. The Exchange
believes increasing the fee for 10 Gb physical ports and charging a
higher fee as compared to the 1 Gb physical port is equitable as the 1
Gb physical port is 1/10th the size of the 10 Gb physical port and
therefore does not offer access to many of the products and services
offered by the Exchange (e.g., ability to receive certain market data
products). Thus, the value of the 1 Gb alternative is lower than the
value of the 10 Gb alternative, when measured based on the type of
Exchange access it offers. Moreover, market participants

that purchase 10 Gb physical ports utilize the most bandwidth and
therefore consume the most resources from the network. As such, the
Exchange believes the proposed fee change for 10 Gb physical ports is
reasonably and appropriately allocated.
    The Exchange also notes Members and non-Members will continue to
choose the method of connectivity based on their specific needs and no
broker-dealer is required to become a Member of, let alone connect
directly to, the Exchange. There is also no regulatory requirement that
any market participant connect to any one particular exchange.
Moreover, direct connectivity is not a requirement to participate on
the Exchange. The Exchange also believes substitutable products and
services are available to market participants, including, among other
things, other options exchanges that a market participant may connect
to in lieu of the Exchange, indirect connectivity to the Exchange via a
third-party reseller of connectivity, and/or trading of any options
product, such as within the Over-the-Counter (OTC) markets which do not
require connectivity to the Exchange. Indeed, there are currently 17
registered options exchanges that trade options (13 of which are not
affiliated with Cboe), some of which have similar or lower connectivity
fees.\13\ Based on publicly available information, no single options
exchange has more than approximately 20% of the market share.\14\
Further, low barriers to entry mean that new exchanges may rapidly
enter the market and offer additional substitute platforms to further
compete with the Exchange and the products it offers. For example,
there are 3 exchanges that have been added in the U.S. options markets
in the last 5 years (i.e., Nasdaq MRX, LLC, MIAX Pearl, LLC, MIAX
Emerald LLC, and most recently MEMX LLC).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Id.
    \14\ See Cboe Global Markets U.S. Options Market Volume Summary
(October 13, 2023), available at https://markets.cboe.com/us/options/market_statistics/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted above, there is no regulatory requirement that any market
participant connect to any one options exchange, nor that any market
participant connect at a particular connection speed or act in a
particular capacity on the Exchange, or trade any particular product
offered on an exchange. Moreover, membership is not a requirement to
participate on the Exchange. Indeed, the Exchange is unaware of any one
options exchange whose membership includes every registered broker-
dealer. By way of example, while the Exchange has 51 members that trade
options, Cboe BZX has 61 members that trade options, and Cboe C2 has 52
Trading Permit Holders (``TPHs'') (i.e., members). There is also no
firm that is a Member of EDGX Options only. Further, based on publicly
available information regarding a sample of the Exchange's competitors,
NYSE American Options has 71 members,\15\ and NYSE Arca Options has 69
members,\16\ MIAX Options has 46 members \17\ and MIAX Pearl Options
has 40 members.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See https://www.nyse.com/markets/american-options/membership#directory.
    \16\ See https://www.nyse.com/markets/arca-options/membership#directory.
    \17\ See https://www.miaxglobal.com/sites/default/files/page-files/MIAX_Options_Exchange_Members_April_2023_04282023.pdf.
    \18\ See https://www.miaxglobal.com/sites/default/files/page-files/MIAX_Pearl_Exchange_Members_01172023_0.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A market participant may submit orders to the Exchange via a Member
broker or a third-party reseller of connectivity. The Exchange notes
that third-party non-Members also resell exchange connectivity. This
indirect connectivity is another viable alternative for market
participants to trade on the Exchange without connecting directly to
the Exchange (and thus not pay the Exchange connectivity fees), which
alternative is already being used by non-Members and further constrains
the price that the Exchange is able to charge for connectivity to its
Exchange.\19\ The Exchange notes that it could, but chooses not to,
preclude market participants from reselling its connectivity. Unlike
other exchanges, the Exchange also chooses not to adopt fees that would
be assessed to third-party resellers on a per customer basis (i.e., fee
based on number of Members that connect to the Exchange indirectly via
the third-party).\20\ Particularly, these third-party resellers may
purchase the Exchange's physical ports and resell access to such ports
either alone or as part of a package of services. The Exchange notes
that multiple Members are able to share a single physical port (and
corresponding bandwidth) with other non-affiliated Members if purchased
through a third-party re-seller.\21\ This allows resellers to mutualize
the costs of the ports for market participants and provide such ports
at a price that may be lower than the Exchange charges due to this
mutualized connectivity. These third-party sellers may also provide an
additional value to market participants as they may also manage and
monitor these connections, and clients of these third-parties may also
be able to connect from the same colocation facility either from their
own racks or using the third-party's managed racks and infrastructure
which may provide further cost-savings. As such, even firms that wish
to utilize a single, dedicated 10 Gb port (i.e., use one single 10 Gb
port themselves instead of sharing a port with other firms), may still
realize cost savings via a third-party reseller because such reseller
may be providing additional services and infrastructure support
alongside the physical port offering (e.g., providing space, hosting,
power, and other long-haul connectivity options). Further, as noted
above, the Exchange does not receive any connectivity revenue when
connectivity is resold by a third-party, which often is resold to
multiple customers, some of whom are agency broker-dealers that have
numerous customers of their own. Therefore given the availability of
third-party providers that also offer connectivity solutions, the
Exchange believes participation on the Exchange remains affordable
(notwithstanding the proposed fee change) for all market participants,
including trading firms that may be able to take advantage of lower
costs that result from mutualized connectivity and/or from other
services provided alongside the physical port offerings. Because third-
party resellers also act as a viable alternative to direct connectivity
to the Exchange, the price that the Exchange is able to charge for
direct connectivity to its Exchange is constrained. Further, the
Exchange believes its offerings are more affordable

as compared to similar offerings at competitor exchanges.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Third-party resellers of connectivity play an important
role in the capital markets infrastructure ecosystem. For example,
third-party resellers can help unify access for customers who want
exposure to multiple financial markets that are geographically
dispersed by establishing connectivity to all of the different
exchanges, so the customers themselves do not haave to. Many of the
third-party connectivity resellers also act as distribution agents
for all of the market data generated by the exchanges as they can
use their established connectivity to subscribe to, and
redistribute, data over their networks. This may remove barriers
that infrastructure requirements may otherwise pose for customers
looking to access multiple markets and real-time data feeds. This
facilitation of overall access to the marketplace is ultimately
beneficial for the entire capital markets ecosystem, including the
Exchange, on which such firms transact business.
    \20\ See, e.g., Nasdaq Price List--US Direct Connection and
Extranet Fees, available at, US Direct-Extranet Connection
(nasdaqtrader.com); and Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 74077
(January 16, 2022), 80 FR 3683 (January 23, 2022) (SR-NASDAQ-2015-
002); and 82037 (November 8, 2022), 82 FR 52953 (November 15, 2022)
(SR-NASDAQ-2017-114).
    \21\ For example, a third-party reseller may purchase one 10 Gb
physical port from the Exchange and resell that connectivity to
three different market participants who may only need 3 Gb each and
leverage the same single port.
    \22\ See e.g., The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq''), General
8, Connectivity to the Exchange. Nasdaq and its affiliated exchanges
charge a monthly fee of $15,000 for each 10Gbps Ultra fiber
connection to the respective exchange, which is analogous to the
Exchange's 10Gbps physical port. See also New York Stock Exchange
LLC, NYSE American LLC, NYSE Arca, Inc., NYSE Chicago Inc., NYSE
National, Inc. Connectivity Fee Schedule, which provides that 10
Gbps LX LCN Circuits (which are analogous to the Exchange's 10 Gbps
physical port) are assessed $22,000 per month, per port.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, the vigorous competition among national securities
exchanges provides many alternatives for firms to voluntarily decide
whether direct connectivity to the Exchange is appropriate and
worthwhile, and as noted above, no broker-dealer is required to become
a Member of the Exchange, let alone connect directly to it. In the
event that a market participant views the Exchange's proposed fee
change as more or less attractive than the competition, that market
participant can choose to connect to the Exchange indirectly or may
choose not to connect to that exchange and connect instead to one or
more of the other 13 non-Cboe affiliated options markets. Indeed,
market participants are free to choose which exchange or reseller to
use to satisfy their business needs. Moreover, if the Exchange charges
excessive fees, it may stand to lose not only connectivity revenues but
also revenues associated with the execution of orders routed to it,
and, to the extent applicable, market data revenues. The Exchange
believes that this competitive dynamic imposes powerful restraints on
the ability of any exchange to charge unreasonable fees for
connectivity. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Exchange still
believes that the proposed fee increase is reasonable, equitably
allocated and not unfairly discriminatory, even for market participants
that determine to connect directly to the Exchange for business
purposes, as those business reasons should presumably result in revenue
capable of covering the proposed fee.

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 fee change will
not impact intramarket competition because it will apply to all
similarly situated Members equally (i.e., all market participants that
choose to purchase the 10 Gb physical port). Additionally, the Exchange
does not believe its proposed pricing will impose a barrier to entry to
smaller participants and notes that its proposed connectivity pricing
is associated with relative usage of the various market participants.
For example, market participants with modest capacity needs can
continue to buy the less expensive 1 Gb physical port (which cost is
not changing) or may choose to obtain access via a third-party re-
seller. While pricing may be increased for the larger capacity physical
ports, such options provide far more capacity and are purchased by
those that consume more resources from the network. Accordingly, the
proposed connectivity fees do not favor certain categories of market
participants in a manner that would impose a burden on competition;
rather, the allocation reflects the network resources consumed by the
various size of market participants--lowest bandwidth consuming members
pay the least, and highest bandwidth consuming members pays the most.
    The Exchange's proposed fee is also still lower than some fees for
similar connectivity on other exchanges and therefore may stimulate
intermarket competition by attracting additional firms to connect to
the Exchange or at least should not deter interested participants from
connecting directly to the Exchange. Further, if the changes proposed
herein are unattractive to market participants, the Exchange can, and
likely will, see a decline in connectivity via 10 Gb physical ports as
a result. The Exchange operates in a highly competitive market in which
market participants can determine whether or not to connect directly to
the Exchange based on the value received compared to the cost of doing
so.

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

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

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) of the Act \23\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \24\
thereunder. 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 will institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or
disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \24\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
file number SR-CboeEDGX-2023-064 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-CboeEDGX-2023-064. 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 (https://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
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. Do not
include personal identifiable information in submissions; you should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. We
may redact in part or withhold entirely from publication submitted
material that is obscene or subject to copyright protection. All

submissions should refer to file number SR-CboeEDGX-2023-064 and should
be submitted on or before November 17, 2023.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-23708 Filed 10-26-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 140 (Monday, July 26, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 39949-39952]
[FR Doc No: 2021-15768]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2020-1100; Airspace Docket No. 20-AGL-1]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of V-9, V-63, V-100, V-158, V-171, and T-325; and
Revocation of V-127 in the Vicinity of Rockford, IL

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends VHF Omnidirectional Range (VOR) Federal
airways V-9, V-63, V-100, V-158, and V-171; amends Area Navigation
(RNAV) route T-325; and removes VOR Federal airway V-127 in the
vicinity of Rockford, IL. The air traffic service (ATS) route
modifications are necessary due to the planned decommissioning of the
VOR portion of the Rockford, IL, VOR/Distance Measuring Equipment (VOR/
DME) navigational aid (NAVAID). Except for RNAV route T-325, the
Rockford VOR/DME NAVAID provides navigation guidance for portions of
the affected routes listed above. The Rockford VOR is being
decommissioned as part of the FAA's VOR Minimum Operational Network
(MON) program.

DATES: Effective date 0901 UTC, October 7, 2021. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.11 and
publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.11E, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can
contact the Rules and Regulations Group, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. The Order is also available for inspection
at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of FAA Order 7400.11E at NARA, email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to https://

www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Colby Abbott, Rules and Regulations
Group, Office of Policy, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the
efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority as it modifies the route structure as necessary to preserve
the safe and efficient flow of air traffic within the National Airspace
System.

History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking for Docket No.
FAA-2020-1100 in the Federal Register (85 FR 81433; December 16, 2020),
amending VOR Federal airways V-9, V-63, V-100, V-158, and V-171;
amending RNAV route T-325; and removing VOR Federal airway V-127 in the
vicinity of Rockford, IL. The proposed amendment and revocation actions
were due to the planned decommissioning of the VOR portion of the
Rockford, IL, VOR/DME NAVAID. Interested parties were invited to
participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on
the proposal. No comments were received.
    VOR Federal airways are published in paragraph 6010(a) and RNAV T-
routes are published in paragraph 6011 of FAA Order 7400.11E, dated
July 21, 2020, and effective September 15, 2020, which is incorporated
by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The VOR Federal airways listed in this
document will be published subsequently in the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order 7400.11E, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated July 21, 2020, and effective September 15,
2020. FAA Order 7400.11E is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11E lists Class A,
B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

Differences From the NPRM

    In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to amend RNAV route T-325 by removing
the Terre Haute VOR/Tactical Air Navigation (VORTAC) and replacing it
with the JIBKA, IN, waypoint (WP) and then extending the route
northward from the JIBKA, IN, WP to the Oshkosh, WI, VORTAC. The
proposed RNAV route T-325 description in the regulatory text section of
the NPRM inadvertently listed the RENRO, KY, route point as a FIX, in
error. The correct reference for the RENRO, KY, route point should have
reflected it as a WP. As such, the proposed T-325 route description in
the NPRM should have reflected the RENRO, KY, route point as a ``WP''
instead of ``FIX.'' This RNAV route point correction to the T-325
description is included in this action.

The Rule

    This action amends 14 CFR part 71 by modifying VOR Federal airways
V-9, V-63, V-100, V-158, and V-171; modifying RNAV route T-325; and
removing VOR Federal airway V-127. The planned decommissioning of the
VOR portion of the Rockford, IL, VOR/DME has made this action
necessary.
    The VOR Federal airway changes are outlined below.
    V-9: V-9 extends between the Leeville, LA, VORTAC and the Houghton,
MI, VOR/DME. The airway segment overlying the Rockford, IL, VOR/DME
between the Pontiac, IL, VOR/DME and the Janesville, WI, VOR/DME is
removed. The unaffected portions of the existing airway remain as
charted.
    V-63: V-63 extends between the Razorback, AR, VORTAC and the
Oshkosh, WI, VORTAC; and between the Wausau, WI, VOR/DME and the
Houghton, MI, VOR/DME. That airspace at and above 10,000 feet MSL from
5 NM north to 46 NM north of Quincy, IL, when the Howard West MOA is
active, is excluded. The airway segment overlying the Rockford, IL,
VOR/DME between the Davenport, IA, VORTAC and the Janesville, WI, VOR/
DME is removed. The unaffected portions of the existing airway remain
as charted and the exclusion language remains unchanged.
    V-100: V-100 extends between the Medicine Bow, WY, VOR/DME and the
O'Neill, NE, VORTAC; and between the Fort Dodge, IA, VORTAC and the
Litchfield, MI, VOR/DME. The airway segment overlying the Rockford, IL,
VOR/DME between the Dubuque, IA, VORTAC and the Northbrook, IL, VOR/DME
is removed. The unaffected portions of the existing airway remain as
charted.
    V-127: V-127 extends between the Bradford, IL, VORTAC and the
Rockford, IL, VOR/DME. The airway is removed in its entirety.
    V-158: V-158 extends between the Mason City, IA, VORTAC and the
intersection of the Polo, IL, VOR/DME 122[deg] and the Rockford, IL,
VOR/DME 169[deg] radials (SHOOF fix). The airspace within R-3302 is
excluded. The airway is retained by redefining the SHOOF fix as the
intersection of the Polo, IL, VOR/DME 122[deg] and Davenport, IA,
VORTAC, 087[deg] radials. The existing airway remains as charted and
the exclusion language remains unchanged.
    V-171: V-171 extends between the Lexington, KY, VOR/DME and the
Rockford, IL, VOR/DME; and between the Nodine, MN, VORTAC and the
Roseau, MN, VOR/DME. The airway segment between the Joliet, IL, VOR/DME
and the Rockford, IL, VOR/DME is removed. The unaffected portions of
the existing airway remain as charted.
    The RNAV T-route changes are outlined below.
    T-325: T-325 extends between the Bowling Green, KY, DME NAVAID and
the Terre Haute, IN, VORTAC. The Terre Haute VORTAC route point is
removed and replaced with the JIBKA, IN, WP located near the Terre
Haute VORTAC, and the route is extended northward from the JIBKA, IN,
WP to the Oshkosh, WI, VORTAC. The following points are added between
the JIBKA WP and the Oshkosh VORTAC: CAPPY, IL, WP; SMARS, IL, WP;
TRENM, IL, WP; START, IL, WP; GRIFT, IL, WP; DEBOW, WI, WP; LUNGS, WI,
WP; and the HOMNY, WI, WP. The unaffected segments of the existing
route remain as charted.
    All radials in the VOR Federal airway descriptions below are stated
in True degrees.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore: (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulatory

Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does
not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated
impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will only
affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that
this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action of modifying VOR Federal
airways V-9, V-63, V-100, V-158, and V-171; modifying RNAV route T-325;
and removing VOR Federal airway V-127, due to the planned
decommissioning of the VOR portion of the Rockford, IL, VOR/DME NAVAID,
qualifies for categorical exclusion under the National Environmental
Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and its implementing regulations at
40 CFR part 1500, and in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F,
Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures, paragraph 5-6.5a, which
categorically excludes from further environmental impact review
rulemaking actions that designate or modify classes of airspace areas,
airways, routes, and reporting points (see 14 CFR part 71, Designation
of Class A, B, C, D, and E Airspace Areas; Air Traffic Service Routes;
and Reporting Points). As such, this action is not expected to result
in any potentially significant environmental impacts. In accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1F, paragraph 5-2 regarding Extraordinary
Circumstances, the FAA has reviewed this action for factors and
circumstances in which a normally categorically excluded action may
have a significant environmental impact requiring further analysis. The
FAA has therefore determined that no extraordinary circumstances exist
that warrant preparation of an environmental assessment or
environmental impact study.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11E,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated July 21, 2020, and
effective September 15, 2020, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6010(a) Domestic VOR Federal Airways.

* * * * *

V-9 [Amended]

    From Leeville, LA; McComb, MS; INT McComb 004[deg] and Magnolia,
MS, 194[deg] radials; Magnolia; Sidon, MS; Marvell, AR; Gilmore, AR;
Malden, MO; Farmington, MO; St. Louis, MO; Spinner, IL; to Pontiac,
IL. From Janesville, WI; Madison, WI; Oshkosh, WI; Green Bay, WI;
Iron Mountain, MI; to Houghton, MI.
* * * * *

V-63 [Amended]

    From Razorback, AR; Springfield, MO; Hallsville, MO; Quincy, IL;
Burlington, IA; Moline, IL; to Davenport, IA. From Janesville, WI;
Badger, WI; to Oshkosh, WI. From Wausau, WI; Rhinelander, WI; to
Houghton, MI. Excluding that airspace at and above10,000 feet MSL
from 5 NM north to 46 NM north of Quincy, IL, when the Howard West
MOA is active.
* * * * *

V-100 [Amended]

    From Medicine Bow, WY; Scottsbluff, NE; Alliance, NE; Ainsworth,
NE; to O'Neill, NE. From Fort Dodge, IA; Waterloo, IA; to Dubuque,
IA. From Northbrook, IL; INT Northbrook 095[deg] and Keeler, MI,
271[deg] radials; Keeler; to Litchfield, MI.
* * * * *

V-127 [Removed]

* * * * *

V-158 [Amended]

    From Mason City, IA; INT Mason City 106[deg] and Dubuque, IA,
293[deg] radials; Dubuque; Polo, IL; to INT Polo 122[deg] and
Davenport, IA, 087[deg] radials. The airspace within R-3302 is
excluded.
* * * * *

V-171 [Amended]

    From Lexington, KY; INT Lexington 251[deg] and Louisville, KY,
114[deg] radials; Louisville; Terre Haute, IN; Danville, IL;
Peotone, IL; INT Peotone 281[deg] and Joliet, IL, 173[deg] radials;
to Joliet. From Nodine, MN; INT Nodine 298[deg] and Farmington, MN,
124[deg] radials; Farmington; Darwin, MN; Alexandria, MN; INT
Alexandria 321[deg] and Grand Forks, ND, 152[deg] radials; Grand
Forks; to Roseau, MN.
* * * * *

Paragraph 6011 United States Area Navigation Routes.

* * * * *

T-325 Bowling Green, KY (BWG) to Oshkosh, WI (OSH) [Amended]

Bowling Green, KY       DME                    (Lat. 36[deg]55'43.47'' N, long. 086[deg]26'36.36'' W)
 (BWG)
RENRO, KY               WP                     (Lat. 37[deg]28'50.53'' N, long. 086[deg]39'19.25'' W)
LOONE, KY               WP                     (Lat. 37[deg]44'14.43'' N, long. 086[deg]45'18.02'' W)
APALO, IN               FIX                    (Lat. 38[deg]00'20.59'' N, long. 086[deg]51'35.27'' W)
BUNKA, IN               FIX                    (Lat. 39[deg]04'57.32'' N, long. 087[deg]09'06.58'' W)
JIBKA, IN               WP                     (Lat. 39[deg]30'08.93'' N, long. 087[deg]16'26.74'' W)
CAPPY, IL               WP                     (Lat. 40[deg]00'06.00'' N, long. 087[deg]44'31.22'' W)
SMARS, IL               WP                     (Lat. 41[deg]07'38.18'' N, long. 088[deg]51'38.22'' W)
TRENM, IL               WP                     (Lat. 41[deg]17'24.93'' N, long. 089[deg]00'27.53'' W)
START, IL               WP                     (Lat. 41[deg]45'24.83'' N, long. 089[deg]00'21.81'' W)
GRIFT, IL               WP                     (Lat. 42[deg]17'28.14'' N, long. 088[deg]53'41.42'' W)
DEBOW, WI               WP                     (Lat. 42[deg]44'08.30'' N, long. 088[deg]50'48.92'' W)
LUNGS, WI               WP                     (Lat. 43[deg]02'43.66'' N, long. 088[deg]56'54.86'' W)
HOMNY, WI               WP                     (Lat. 43[deg]31'02.22'' N, long. 088[deg]39'40.15'' W)
Oshkosh, WI (OSH)       VORTAC                 (Lat. 43[deg]59'25.56'' N, long. 088[deg]33'21.36'' W)

* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, on July 22, 2021.
George Gonzalez,
Acting Manager, Rules and Regulations Group.
[FR Doc. 2021-15768 Filed 7-23-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: April 9, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 67)]
[Notices]
[Page 17543-17544]
[DOCID:fr09ap07-59]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP07-374-000]

Hardy Storage Company, LLC; Notice of Tariff Filing and Non-
Conforming Service Agreements

April 3, 2007.
    Take notice that on March 30, 2007 Hardy Storage Company, LLC
(Hardy) tendered for filing as part of its FERC

Gas Tariff, Original Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets, with a
proposed effective date of April 1, 2007:

First Revised Sheet No. 197.
Original Sheet No. 200.

    Hardy also tendered for filing the following four non-conforming
Service Agreements for consideration and approval:
    (1) HSS Service Agreement between Hardy Storage Company, LLC and
Baltimore Gas & Electric Company (Dated February 2, 2006);
    (2) HSS Service Agreement between Hardy Storage Company, LLC and
City of Charlottesville (Dated February 2, 2006);
    (3) HSS Service Agreement between Hardy Storage Company, LLC and
Piedmont Natural Gas Company (Dated February 2, 2006); and
    (4) HSS Service Agreement between Hardy Storage Company, LLC and
Washington Gas Light Company (Dated February 2, 2006).
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of
Sec.  154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone
filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on
the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on or before
the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to intervene or
protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Philis J. Posey,
Acting Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-6570 Filed 4-6-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 149 (Monday, August 3, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46658-46659]
[FR Doc No: 2020-16794]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2020-N-1576]

Assessing the Resource Needs of the Generic Drug User Fee
Amendments; Publication of Report; Request for Comments

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of report publication; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing
the publication of a report, entitled ``Independent Evaluation of the
GDUFA Resource Capacity Planning Adjustment Methodology,'' providing
options and recommendations for a new methodology to assess accurately
changes in the resource needs of the generic drug review program. FDA,
in the Generic Drug User Fee Amendments of 2017 (GDUFA II), committed
to obtaining this report through a contract with an independent third
party and publishing it before September 30, 2020. FDA is announcing
publication of this report and the opening of a docket to receive
public comment on this report.

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on the report by
September 2, 2020 to ensure that the Agency considers your comment on
this report.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on this report at any time prior to
September 2, 2020 as follows:

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2020-N-1576 for ``Assessing the Resource Needs of the Generic Drug
User Fee Amendments, Publication of Report; Request for Comments.''
Comments filed in a timely manner (see ADDRESSES), will be placed in
the docket and, except for those submitted as ``Confidential
Submissions,'' publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at
the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish
your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you
can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of
your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not
be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other
applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of
comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or
access the information at: https://

www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Graham Thompson, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, Rm. 1146, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-
796-5003, Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FDA is announcing the publication of a
report, entitled ``Independent Evaluation of the GDUFA Resource
Capacity Planning Adjustment Methodology,'' providing options and
recommendations for a methodology to accurately assess changes in the
resource needs of the generic drug review program. FDA, in the GDUFA II
Commitment Letter \1\ (entitled GDUFA Reauthorization Performance Goals
and Program Enhancements Fiscal Years 2018-2022), committed to
obtaining this report and publishing it before September 30, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Available at: https://www.fda.gov/media/101052/download.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The third authorization of the Prescription Drug User Fee Act
(PDUFA III), which began in fiscal year 2003, introduced the concept of
a Workload Adjuster. This was a mechanism to ensure that the annual
revenue for the program could be adjusted based on workload levels to
ensure adequate staffing levels. Since its introduction, several
updates have been made to the methodology, including its renaming as
the Capacity Planning Adjustment (CPA).
    GDUFA does not currently have a methodology analogous to the CPA to
enable adjustment of the annual target revenue. The study announced by
this notice posits options and recommendations to consider regarding
the potential application of an adjustment methodology for the GDUFA
program.
    FDA commissioned Booz Allen Hamilton to produce this report. The
report is publicly available on FDA's website at: https://www.fda.gov/industry/fda-user-fee-programs/resource-capacity-planning-and-modernized-time-reporting. FDA will review the public comments on the
report.

    Dated: July 28, 2020.
Lowell J. Schiller,
Principal Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2020-16794 Filed 7-31-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P