Appointment of Army Officials to the Army Emergency Relief-Board of Managers and Board of Advisors, 13870-13871 [E8-5134]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
13870
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 51 / Friday, March 14, 2008 / Notices
or impair the ability of the Commission
or OneChicago to discharge any
regulatory or self-regulatory duty under
the Act.
IV. Request for Comment
The purposes of the CEA include
‘‘promot[ing] responsible innovation
and fair competition among boards of
trade, other markets and market
participants.’’ 25 Based on the foregoing,
it may be consistent with these and the
other purposes of the CEA, and with the
public interest, for ST gold futures
contracts to trade on OneChicago as
security futures. The Commission urges
interested persons to provide comments
that will assist the Commission in
conducting its analysis of the issues
relevant to this proposal. This release is
not intended in any way to alter the
current status of any transaction that is
subject to one or more provisions of the
’33 or ’34 Acts or the CEA, including
any regulations adopted thereunder.
V. Related Matters
A. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA) 26 imposes certain requirements
on federal agencies (including the
Commission) in connection with their
conducting or sponsoring any collection
of information as defined by the PRA.
The proposed exemptive order would
not, if issued, require a new collection
of information from any entity that
would be subject to the proposed order.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
B. Cost-Benefit Analysis
Section 15(a) of the CEA, as amended
by Section 119 of the Commodity
Futures Modernization Act of 2000,27
requires the Commission to consider the
costs and benefits of its action before
issuing an order under the CEA. Section
15(a) of the Act further specifies that
costs and benefits shall be evaluated in
light of the following five broad areas of
market and public concern: Protection
of market participants and the public;
efficiency, competitiveness, and
financial integrity of futures markets;
price discovery; sound risk management
practices; and other public interest
considerations. By its terms, Section
15(a) does not require the Commission
to quantify the costs and benefits of an
order or to determine whether the
benefits of the order outweigh its costs.
Rather, Section 15(a) simply requires
the Commission to ‘‘consider the costs
25 CEA section 3(b), 7 U.S.C. 5(b). See also CEA
section 4(c)(1), 7 U.S.C. 6(c)(1) (purpose of
exemption is ‘‘to promote responsible economic or
financial innovation and fair competition.’’)
26 44 U.S.C. 3507(d).
27 7 U.S.C. 19(a).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:17 Mar 13, 2008
Jkt 214001
and benefits’’ of its action. Accordingly,
the Commission could in its discretion
give greater weight to any one of the five
enumerated areas and could in its
discretion determine that,
notwithstanding its costs, a particular
order was necessary or appropriate to
protect the public interest or to
effectuate any of the provisions or to
accomplish any of the purposes of the
CEA. The Commission specifically
invites public comment on its analysis
of the costs and benefits associated with
the proposed issuance of an exemptive
order under Section 4(c) of the Act.
The primary cost that could be
associated with the proposed exemptive
order is the burden that may arise from
subjecting transactions in ST gold
futures contracts, and thereby the
market participants transacting in such
contracts, to the dual regulation of
security futures by the Commission and
the SEC. Potential costs arising from
dual regulation, however, are
outweighed by the legal certainty and
additional benefits that could arise from
the issuance of the proposed exemptive
order. For example, permitting the
trading of ST gold futures contracts on
OneChicago, through the issuance of the
proposed exemptive order, could
facilitate price discovery for gold and
gold-linked interests given that a liquid
market in ST gold futures contracts
would serve as an additional source for
discerning the appropriate market value
of gold. As discussed previously, the
issuance of the proposed exemptive
order may also foster competition by
bringing a new derivatives product to
market expeditiously without negatively
impacting potential innovations in other
markets for other commodities.
In addition, the issuance of the
proposed exemptive order would not
result in any costs in terms of reduced
protections for Commission-regulated
markets or market participants.
Transactions in ST gold futures
contracts, pursuant to the proposed
exemption, would be executed on
OneChicago as security futures and
would be subject to extensive and
detailed regulation by the SEC and the
Commission. Consequently, only
intermediaries registered or noticeregistered with the Commission and the
SEC would be able to solicit, accept
orders for, or deal in any transactions in
connection with ST gold futures
contracts. The implementation of an
exemption, under these circumstances,
would not negatively impact any
applicable regulatory measure designed
to protect market participants or the
public interest. With respect to financial
integrity, The Options Clearing
Corporation, as both a derivatives
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
clearing organization registered as such
with the Commission and a clearing
agency registered as such with the SEC,
would carry out the clearing and
settlement of OneChicago’s ST gold
futures contracts, including directing
appropriate arrangements for the
payment and physical delivery of the
Shares that would underlie the ST gold
futures contracts.
After considering the factors
presented in this release, the
Commission has determined to seek
comment on the proposed order as
discussed above.
Issued in Washington, DC, on March 10,
2008 by the Commission.
David A. Stawick,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. E8–5203 Filed 3–13–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6351–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Army
Appointment of Army Officials to the
Army Emergency Relief—Board of
Managers and Board of Advisors
Department of the Army, DoD.
Notice.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: Notice is given of certain
Army officials assigned to positions
authorized to serve without
compensation as a director or officer, or
to otherwise participate in the
management of the Army Emergency
Relief (AER), a military welfare society.
DATES: Effective Date: December 17,
2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sandra Stockel, 703–695–4296, Office of
the Army General Counsel, 104 Army
Pentagon, Washington, DC 20310–0104.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Office
of the Army General Counsel, in
accordance with 10 U.S.C. 1033 and by
DoD regulation (DoD 5500.7–R,
Standards of Conduct, section 3–202),
announces the appointment of certain
Army officials to serve without
compensation as a director or officer, or
to otherwise participate in the
management of the Army Emergency
Relief, a military welfare society. NonFederal entities in these categories must
be predesignated by the Secretary of
Defense. The Secretary of Defense’s
authority for such designations was
delegated to the Department of Defense
General Counsel, who has designated all
of the organizations, and concurred in
all of the appointments, listed below.
Appointments made under this
authority extend to the named officials,
E:\FR\FM\14MRN1.SGM
14MRN1
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 51 / Friday, March 14, 2008 / Notices
as well as to their successors. The
Secretary of the Army has made the
following appointments with the
concurrence of the Department of
Defense General Counsel:
To the Board of Managers of the Army
Emergency Relief:
1. Vice Chief of Staff, U.S. Army.
2. Sergeant Major of the Army.
3. The Inspector General.
4. Deputy Commanding General, U.S.
Army Materiel Command.
5. Deputy Chief of Staff, G–1, U.S.
Army Forces Command.
6. Director, Installation Management
Agency.
7. Deputy Chief of Staff, G–1, U.S.
Army.
8. Deputy Commanding General/Chief
of Staff, U.S. Army Training and
Doctrine Command.
9. Commanding General, U.S. Army
Soldier Support Institute.
10. Deputy Chief of Staff, G–1, U.S.
Army Europe and Seventh Army.
11. Command Sergeant Major, U.S.
Army Sergeants Major Academy.
12. Command Sergeant Major, U.S.
Army Forces Command.
To the Board of Advisors:
1. Chief of Staff, Army.
2. Commander, UNC/Combined
Forces Command/U.S. Forces, Korea.
3. Commander, U.S. Army Materiel
Command.
4. Commanding General, U.S. Army
Europe and Seventh Army.
5. Commanding General, U.S. Army
Forces Command.
6. Commanding General, U.S. Army
Training and Doctrine Command.
7. Commanding General, U.S. Army
Pacific.
8. The Surgeon General/Commanding
General, U.S. Army Medical Command.
9. Chief of Engineers/Commanding
General, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
10. Commanding General, U.S. Army
Intelligence and Security Command.
11. Commanding General, Military
Surface Deployment and Distribution
Command.
12. Commanding General, U.S. Army
Military District of Washington/
Commander, Joint Force HeadquartersNational Capital Region.
13. Provost Marshal/Commanding
General, U.S. Army Criminal
Investigation Command.
Brenda S. Bowen,
Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. E8–5134 Filed 3–13–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3710–08–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:17 Mar 13, 2008
Jkt 214001
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Army; Corps of
Engineers
Intent To Prepare a Draft
Environmental Impact Statement/
Environmental Impact Report (DEIS/
EIR) for the San Bernardino Lakes and
Streams, San Bernardino County, CA
Department of the Army, U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, DOD.
ACTION: Notice of intent.
AGENCY:
The purpose of the study is to
evaluate approximately a 16-mile reach
of the Santa Ana River along the
southern boundary of the City of San
Bernardino and the northern boundary
of the City of Redlands located in San
Bernardino County, CA. The focus will
be on watershed improvements by
developing alternatives for ecosystem
restoration, and incorporating flood risk
management features in some areas in
downtown San Bernardino and
Redlands. The restoration project will
concentrate on revitalization of the
riparian vegetation community;
establish environmental corridor to
benefit wildlife and sensitive species;
and address flood risk management
uses. The portion of the Santa Ana River
to be studied is located entirely within
San Bernardino County, CA.
DATES: Provide comments by April 28,
2008.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments to Mr.
Kirk C. Brus at U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Los Angeles District, CESPL–
PD–RL, P.O. Box 532711, Los Angeles,
CA 90053–2325.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Kirk C. Brus, Environmental
Coordinator, Regional Planning Section,
at 213–452–3876; fax 213–452–4204 or
E-mail at kirk.c.brus@usace.army.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 1.
Authorization: The proposed study is
authorized by House Document No. 135,
81st Congress, 1st Session; dated 8 May
1964, which reads as follows:
SUMMARY:
Resolved by the Committee on Public
Works of the House of Representatives,
United States, that the Board of Engineers for
Rivers and Harbors is hereby requested to
review the reports on (a) San Gabriel River
and Tributaries, published as House
Document No. 838, 76th Congress, 3d
Session; and (b) Santa Ana River and
Tributaries.
The proposed study is also authorized
by House Document 20, 106th Congress,
1st Session Adopted April 15, 1999,
which reads as follows:
Resolved by the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure of the
United States House of Representatives, that
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
13871
the Secretary of the Army is requested to
review the report of the Chief of the
Engineers of Santa Ana River Main Stem,
including Santiago Creek, California, and
other pertinent reports to determine whether
modification to the recommendations
contained therein are advisable at the present
time in the interest of reducing the risks to
public safety and property caused by
flooding from high groundwater conditions,
groundwater liquefaction related water
quality contamination and environmental
damage in the City of San Bernardino,
California and adjacent communities.
2. Background: The San Bernardino
Valley has undergone considerable land
use changes since 1842 when Mexico
granted Rancho San Bernardino to
Antonio Maria Lugo who grazed
thousands of head of cattle in the valley
dotted with streams, riparian corridors,
wetland and marsh areas, seeps and
meadows. Naval oranges and other
profitable agriculture crops fueled the
growth through the 1870’s. The 1880’s
brought the gold rush, more growth, and
from the late 1880’s until 1965, the
Pacific Electric Railway Company
played a significant role in the
development of San Bernardino County.
With continued urbanization and
growth and development of industry
and new technology land transitioned
from agricultural use to development of
business, industrial and residential
property. Due to the development of
modern railroads and the transition
from passenger and freight to freight
only, the re-configuration of rail-routes
and transportation hubs through the
1960’s and 1970’s have significantly
impacted San Bernardino Valley. The
growth and development of the
community resulted in the loss or
degradation of many of the wetland,
marsh and open-water areas; as well as,
the constriction, fragmentation,
degradation and loss in spatial extent of
the riparian community that once
existed in the San Bernardino Valley
and the Santa Ana River. Impacts to the
groundwater coming from the San
Bernardino Mountains have also
occurred due to the changes in land use.
In the past, groundwater levels have
risen enough to reach the ground
surface, resulting in structural damage,
flooded basements, weakened loadbearing capacity of streets, disrupted
underground utilities, substantially
increasing liquefaction hazard should a
seismic event occur, and increased
development costs and limitations.
Historic high groundwater levels
occurred in 1984 after five consecutive
wet years, when groundwater reached
unacceptably high levels in the San
Bernardino Valley. The 16-mile reach of
the Santa Ana River located between the
City of San Bernardino to the north and
E:\FR\FM\14MRN1.SGM
14MRN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 51 (Friday, March 14, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13870-13871]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-5134]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Army
Appointment of Army Officials to the Army Emergency Relief--Board
of Managers and Board of Advisors
AGENCY: Department of the Army, DoD.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Notice is given of certain Army officials assigned to
positions authorized to serve without compensation as a director or
officer, or to otherwise participate in the management of the Army
Emergency Relief (AER), a military welfare society.
DATES: Effective Date: December 17, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sandra Stockel, 703-695-4296, Office
of the Army General Counsel, 104 Army Pentagon, Washington, DC 20310-
0104.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Office of the Army General Counsel, in
accordance with 10 U.S.C. 1033 and by DoD regulation (DoD 5500.7-R,
Standards of Conduct, section 3-202), announces the appointment of
certain Army officials to serve without compensation as a director or
officer, or to otherwise participate in the management of the Army
Emergency Relief, a military welfare society. Non-Federal entities in
these categories must be predesignated by the Secretary of Defense. The
Secretary of Defense's authority for such designations was delegated to
the Department of Defense General Counsel, who has designated all of
the organizations, and concurred in all of the appointments, listed
below. Appointments made under this authority extend to the named
officials,
[[Page 13871]]
as well as to their successors. The Secretary of the Army has made the
following appointments with the concurrence of the Department of
Defense General Counsel:
To the Board of Managers of the Army Emergency Relief:
1. Vice Chief of Staff, U.S. Army.
2. Sergeant Major of the Army.
3. The Inspector General.
4. Deputy Commanding General, U.S. Army Materiel Command.
5. Deputy Chief of Staff, G-1, U.S. Army Forces Command.
6. Director, Installation Management Agency.
7. Deputy Chief of Staff, G-1, U.S. Army.
8. Deputy Commanding General/Chief of Staff, U.S. Army Training and
Doctrine Command.
9. Commanding General, U.S. Army Soldier Support Institute.
10. Deputy Chief of Staff, G-1, U.S. Army Europe and Seventh Army.
11. Command Sergeant Major, U.S. Army Sergeants Major Academy.
12. Command Sergeant Major, U.S. Army Forces Command.
To the Board of Advisors:
1. Chief of Staff, Army.
2. Commander, UNC/Combined Forces Command/U.S. Forces, Korea.
3. Commander, U.S. Army Materiel Command.
4. Commanding General, U.S. Army Europe and Seventh Army.
5. Commanding General, U.S. Army Forces Command.
6. Commanding General, U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command.
7. Commanding General, U.S. Army Pacific.
8. The Surgeon General/Commanding General, U.S. Army Medical
Command.
9. Chief of Engineers/Commanding General, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers.
10. Commanding General, U.S. Army Intelligence and Security
Command.
11. Commanding General, Military Surface Deployment and
Distribution Command.
12. Commanding General, U.S. Army Military District of Washington/
Commander, Joint Force Headquarters-National Capital Region.
13. Provost Marshal/Commanding General, U.S. Army Criminal
Investigation Command.
Brenda S. Bowen,
Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. E8-5134 Filed 3-13-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3710-08-P
