Anchorage Regulations; Port of New York; Correction, 11293 [E9-5757]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 50 / Tuesday, March 17, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
date payment of the amount was
initially due, consistent with § 199.11 of
this part.
(4) Remedies. In the case of the failure
of a manufacturer of a covered drug to
make or honor an agreement under this
paragraph (q), the Director, TMA, in
addition to other actions referred to in
this paragraph (q), may take any other
action authorized by law.
(5) Beneficiary transition provisions.
In cases in which a pharmaceutical is
removed from the uniform formulary or
designated for preauthorization under
paragraph (q)(2) of this section, the
Director, TMA may for transitional time
periods determined appropriate by the
Director or for particular circumstances
authorize the continued availability of
the pharmaceutical in the retail
pharmacy network or in MTF
pharmacies for some or all beneficiaries
as if the pharmaceutical were still on
the uniform formulary.
Dated: March 10, 2009.
Patricia L. Toppings,
OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer,
Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. E9–5702 Filed 3–16–09; 8:45 am]
section to read: ‘‘We have analyzed this
rule under Department of Homeland
Security Directive 0023.1 and
Commandant Instruction M16475.lD,
which guide the Coast Guard in
complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
have concluded this action is one of a
category of actions which do not
individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human
environment. This rule is categorically
excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph
34(f), of the Instruction. This rule
involves a regulation reducing the size
of an anchorage ground.
Under figure 2–1, paragraph (34)(f), of
the Instruction, an environmental
analysis checklist and a categorical
exclusion determination are not
required for this rule.’’
Dated: March 12, 2009.
Steve G. Venckus,
Chief, Office of Regulations and
Administrative Law.
[FR Doc. E9–5757 Filed 3–16–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION
39 CFR Part 3020
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
[Docket Nos. MC2009–17 and CP2009–24;
Order No. 187]
Coast Guard
Domestic Mail Product
33 CFR Part 110
ACTION:
RIN 1625–AA01
Anchorage Regulations; Port of New
York; Correction
Coast Guard, DHS.
Final rule; correction.
AGENCY:
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with RULES
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is correcting
the preamble to a final rule that
appeared in the Federal Register of
March 11, 2009 (74 FR 10484). The
preamble incorrectly referred to
Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 5100.1, instead
of Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 0023.1.
DATES: Effective April 10, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LT
Edward Munoz, Chief, Waterways
Management Division, telephone 718–
354–2353.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In FR Doc.
E9–5095 appearing on page 10484 of the
Federal Register of Wednesday, March
11, 2009, the following correction is
made:
1. On page 10486, in the second
column, correct the ‘‘Environment’’
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:14 Mar 16, 2009
Postal Regulatory Commission.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
[Docket No. USCG–2008–0155]
Jkt 217001
SUMMARY: The Commission is adding
Express Mail & Priority Mail Contract 4
to the competitive product list. This
action is consistent with changes in a
recent law governing postal operations.
Republication of the lists of market
dominant and competitive products is
also consistent with new requirements
in the law.
DATES: Effective March 17, 2009 and is
applicable beginning March 10, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments
electronically via the Commission’s
Filing Online system at https://
www.prc.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Stephen L. Sharfman, General Counsel,
202–789–6820 and
stephen.sharfman@prc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulatory
History, 74 FR 9316 (March 2, 2009).
The Postal Service seeks to add a new
product identified as Express Mail &
Priority Mail Contract 4 to the
Competitive Product List. For the
reasons discussed below, the
Commission approves the Request.
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
11293
I. Background
On February 20, 2009, the Postal
Service filed a formal request pursuant
to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 39 CFR 3020.30
et seq. to add Express Mail & Priority
Mail Contract 4 to the Competitive
Product List.1 The Postal Service asserts
that the Express Mail & Priority Mail
Contract 4 product is a competitive
product ‘‘not of general applicability’’
within the meaning of 39 U.S.C.
3632(b)(3). This Request has been
assigned Docket No. MC2009–17.
The Postal Service
contemporaneously filed a contract
related to the proposed new product
pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3632(b)(3) and 39
CFR 3015.5. The contract has been
assigned Docket No. CP2009–24.
In support of its Request, the Postal
Service filed the following materials: (1)
A redacted version of the Governors’
Decision authorizing the new product
which also includes an analysis of
Express Mail & Priority Mail Contract 4
and certification of the Governors’
vote; 2 (2) a redacted version of the
contract which, among other things,
provides that the contract will expire 3
years from the effective date, which is
proposed to be 1 day after the
Commission issues all regulatory
approvals; 3 (3) requested changes in the
Mail Classification Schedule product
list; 4 (4) a Statement of Supporting
Justification as required by 39 CFR
3020.32; 5 and (5) certification of
compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a).6
In the Statement of Supporting
Justification, Kim Parks, Manager, Sales
and Communications, Expedited
Shipping, asserts that the service to be
provided under the contract will cover
its attributable costs, make a positive
contribution to coverage of institutional
costs, and will increase contribution
toward the requisite 5.5 percent of the
Postal Service’s total institutional costs.
Request, Attachment D, at 1. W. Ashley
Lyons, Manager, Corporate Financial
Planning, Finance Department, certifies
that the contract complies with 39
U.S.C. 3633(a). See id. Attachment E.
The Postal Service filed much of the
supporting materials, including the
unredacted Governors’ Decision and the
1 Request of the United States Postal Service to
Add Express Mail & Priority Mail Contract 4 to
Competitive Product List and Notice of
Establishment of Rates and Class Not of General
Applicability, February 20, 2009 (Request).
2 Attachment A to the Request. The analysis that
accompanies the Governors’ Decision notes, among
other things, that the contract is not risk free, but
concludes that the risks are manageable.
3 Attachment B to the Request.
4 Attachment C to the Request.
5 Attachment D to the Request.
6 Attachment E to the Request.
E:\FR\FM\17MRR1.SGM
17MRR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 50 (Tuesday, March 17, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 11293]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-5757]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 110
[Docket No. USCG-2008-0155]
RIN 1625-AA01
Anchorage Regulations; Port of New York; Correction
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule; correction.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is correcting the preamble to a final rule
that appeared in the Federal Register of March 11, 2009 (74 FR 10484).
The preamble incorrectly referred to Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 5100.1, instead of Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 0023.1.
DATES: Effective April 10, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LT Edward Munoz, Chief, Waterways
Management Division, telephone 718-354-2353.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In FR Doc. E9-5095 appearing on page 10484
of the Federal Register of Wednesday, March 11, 2009, the following
correction is made:
1. On page 10486, in the second column, correct the ``Environment''
section to read: ``We have analyzed this rule under Department of
Homeland Security Directive 0023.1 and Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have concluded this action is one of a category of actions which do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. This rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1,
paragraph 34(f), of the Instruction. This rule involves a regulation
reducing the size of an anchorage ground.
Under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(f), of the Instruction, an
environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion
determination are not required for this rule.''
Dated: March 12, 2009.
Steve G. Venckus,
Chief, Office of Regulations and Administrative Law.
[FR Doc. E9-5757 Filed 3-16-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P
