Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 171 / Friday, September 3, 2010 / Proposed Rules 54073 

2007 edition, available at http:// 

www.paralympic.org/export/sites/ 

default/IPC/IPC_Handbook/Section_2/ 

2008_2_Classification_Code6.pdf, and 

qualifies the veteran for participation in 

a sport sanctioned by the United States 

Paralympics. 

(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 322(d)) 

Paralympic Training Center refers to 

the following locations: the United 

States Olympic Training Center at Chula 

Vista, California; the United States 

Olympic Training Center at Colorado 

Springs, Colorado; the United States 

Olympic Training Center at Lake Placid, 

New York; the Lakeshore Foundation in 

Birmingham, Alabama; and the 

University of Central Oklahoma in 

Edmond, Oklahoma. 

(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 322(d)) 

§ 76.2 Assistance allowance. 

(a) VA will pay an allowance to a 

veteran with a disability who is: 

(1) Invited by the United States 

Paralympics (USP) to compete for a slot 

on, or selected for, the USP Team for 

any month or part of any month in 

which the veteran is training or 

competing in any event sponsored by 

the USP or the IPC; or 

(2) Residing at a USP training center 

in connection with any paralympic 

training or competition for the period 

certified under § 76.3. 

(b) In providing this allowance, VA 

will periodically assess funding for the 

allowance. If a periodic assessment 

reveals that funding is insufficient to 

pay all applicants, VA will first pay in 

full veterans with service-connected 

disabilities, and then pay others in full 

in the order in which their completed 

applications are received. 

(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 322(d)) 

§ 76.3 Application and certification. 

To receive an allowance— 

(a) A veteran must submit a complete 

application identifying any dependents 

upon which a higher payable rate of 

allowance may be based; and 

(b) USP must provide certification of 

the veteran’s participation in training or 

competition sponsored by the USP or 

the IPC, or residence at a USP training 

center, for the period for which payment 

is requested. The certification must 

specify whether the payment is due for 

training, competition, or residence, and 

the dates of the training, competition, or 

residence for which payment is due. 

(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 322(d)) 

§ 76. Amount of allowance. 

The following rules govern the 

amount of allowance payable to 

veterans under this section. 

(a) Payment will be made at the rate 

paid for a full-time institutional 

program under chapter 31 of title 38, 

United States Code (Chapter 31) that is 

in effect for a period of certified 

participation, as prescribed by 

paragraph (b) of this section. (See 38 

CFR 21.260.) 

(b) Payment may be made for each 

day at 1/30 of the monthly rate to 

veterans who train or compete in USP 

or IPC sponsored events for each day of 

training or competition, or to veterans 

who reside at a USP training center, for 

each day of residence, or on a monthly 

basis at the monthly rate to veterans 

who train or compete continuously for 

a full month, or to veterans who reside 

at a USP training center for a full month. 

(c) VA will pay the allowance at a rate 

paid to a veteran with dependents for a 

full-time Chapter 31 institutional 

program upon receipt of appropriate 

documentation that a veteran who 

qualifies for the allowance has 

dependents. (See 38 CFR 21.260.) 

(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 322(d), 3108) 

[FR Doc. 2010–21921 Filed 9–2–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8320–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid 

Services 

42 CFR Part 447 

[CMS–2238–P2] 

RIN 0938–AP67 

Medicaid Program; Withdrawal of 

Determination of Average 

Manufacturer Price, Multiple Source 

Drug Definition, and Upper Limits for 

Multiple Source Drugs 

AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & 

Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: In this rule, we are proposing 

to withdraw two provisions from the 

‘‘Medicaid Program; Prescription Drugs’’ 

final rule (referred to hereafter as ‘‘AMP 

final rule’’) published in the July 17, 

2007 Federal Register. The provisions 

we are proposing to withdraw are as 

follows: The determination of average 

manufacturer price (AMP), and the 

Federal upper limits (FULs) for multiple 

source drugs. We are also proposing to 

withdraw the definition of ‘‘multiple 

source drug’’ as it was revised in the 

‘‘Medicaid Program; Multiple Source 

Drug Definition’’ final rule published in 

the October 7, 2008 Federal Register. 

The provisions of the AMP final rule 

and the definition of multiple source 

drug that we are proposing to withdraw 

were challenged in a lawsuit that was 

filed in November 2007. The challenged 

regulations have been superseded in 

significant part by the Patient Protection 

and Affordable Care Act, as amended by 

the Health Care and Education 

Reconciliation Act, and the FAA Air 

Transportation Modernization and 

Safety Improvement Act. This document 

would withdraw the regulatory 

provisions challenged in the 

aforementioned litigation. 

DATES: To be assured consideration, 

comments must be received at one of 

the addresses provided below, no later 

than 5 p.m. on October 4, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: In commenting, please refer 

to file code CMS–2238–P2. Because of 

staff and resource limitations, we cannot 

accept comments by facsimile (FAX) 

transmission. 

You may submit comments in one of 

four ways (please choose only one of the 

ways listed): 

1. Electronically. You may submit 

electronic comments on this regulation 

to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

the ‘‘Submit a comment’’ instructions. 

2. By regular mail. You may mail 

written comments to the following 

address ONLY: Centers for Medicare & 

Medicaid Services, Department of 

Health and Human Services, Attention: 

CMS–2238–P2, P.O. Box 8016, 

Baltimore, MD 21244–8016. 

Please allow sufficient time for mailed 

comments to be received before the 

close of the comment period. 

3. By express or overnight mail. You 

may send written comments to the 

following address ONLY: Centers for 

Medicare & Medicaid Services, 

Department of Health and Human 

Services, Attention: CMS–2238–P2, 

Mail Stop C4–26–05, 7500 Security 

Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21244–1850. 

4. By hand or courier. If you prefer, 

you may deliver (by hand or courier) 

your written comments before the close 

of the comment period to either of the 

following addresses: 

a. For delivery in Washington, DC— 

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid 

Services, Department of Health and 

Human Services, Room 445–G, Hubert 

H. Humphrey Building, 200 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20201. 

(Because access to the interior of the 

Hubert H. Humphrey Building is not readily 

available to persons without Federal 

Government identification, commenters are 

encouraged to leave their comments in the 

CMS drop slots located in the main lobby of 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
54074 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 171 / Friday, September 3, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

the building. A stamp-in clock is available for 

persons wishing to retain a proof of filing by 

stamping in and retaining an extra copy of 

the comments being filed.) 

b. For delivery in Baltimore, MD— 

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid 

Services, Department of Health and 

Human Services, 7500 Security 

Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21244– 

1850. 

If you intend to deliver your 

comments to the Baltimore address, 

please call telephone number (410) 786– 

7195 in advance to schedule your 

arrival with one of our staff members. 

Comments mailed to the addresses 

indicated as appropriate for hand or 

courier delivery may be delayed and 

received after the comment period. 

For information on viewing public 

comments, see the beginning of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Wendy Tuttle, (410) 786–8690. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Inspection 

of Public Comments: All comments 

received before the close of the 

comment period are available for 

viewing by the public, including any 

personally identifiable or confidential 

business information that is included in 

a comment. We post all comments 

received before the close of the 

comment period on the following Web 

site as soon as possible after they have 

been received: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the search 

instructions on that Web site to view 

public comments. 

Comments received timely will also 

be available for public inspection as 

they are received, generally beginning 

approximately 3 weeks after publication 

of a document, at the headquarters of 

the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid 

Services, 7500 Security Boulevard, 

Baltimore, Maryland 21244, Monday 

through Friday of each week from 8:30 

a.m. to 4 p.m. To schedule an 

appointment to view public comments, 

phone 1–800–743–3951. 

I. Background 

On July 17, 2007, we published a final 

rule, titled ‘‘Medicaid Program; 

Prescription Drugs’’ in the Federal 

Register (72 FR 39142) (referred to 

hereafter as ‘‘AMP final rule’’), which 

implemented sections 6001(a) through 

(d), 6002, and 6003 of the Deficit 

Reduction Act of 2005 (Pub. L. 109–171, 

enacted on February 8, 2006) (DRA) as 

well as codified parts of section 1927 of 

the Social Security Act (the Act) that 

pertain to requirements for drug 

manufacturers’ calculation and 

reporting of average manufacturer price 

(AMP) and best price, and revised 

existing regulations that set Federal 

upper limits (FULs) for certain covered 

outpatient drugs. The AMP final rule 

also implemented section 1903(i)(10) of 

the Act, as revised by the DRA with 

regard to the denial of FFP in 

expenditures for certain physician 

administered drugs. Finally, the AMP 

final rule addressed other provisions of 

the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program. 

On November 7, 2007, a complaint 

was filed with the United States District 

Court for the District of Columbia by the 

National Association of Chain Drug 

Stores (NACDS) and the National 

Community Pharmacists Association 

(NCPA) (collectively, the Plaintiffs), 

which alleged that the AMP final rule 

unlawfully changes the methodology by 

which pharmacies are reimbursed for 

dispensing prescription drugs to 

Medicaid patients. The Complaint 

sought to enjoin the Department of 

Health and Human Services and CMS 

(the Defendants) from implementing the 

AMP final rule for purposes of 

reimbursing pharmacies and posting on 

a public Web site the data calculated 

pursuant to the AMP final rule. In 

addition, it sought declaratory relief that 

the AMP final rule fails to comply with 

the Act. 

On December 19, 2007, the Court 

issued a preliminary injunction after 

finding that the ‘‘Plaintiffs are likely to 

succeed on the merits of their claims 

that Defendants violated the 

Administrative Procedure Act and acted 

contrary to law and/or arbitrarily and 

capriciously in creating’’ the AMP final 

rule because ‘‘the AMP Rule does not 

comply with either the statutory 

definition of ‘average manufacturer 

price’ or the statutory definition of 

‘multiple source drug’ as stated by the 

Court.’’ Accordingly, the preliminary 

injunction prohibits CMS from 

‘‘[u]ndertaking any and all action to 

implement the AMP Rule to the extent 

such action affects Medicaid 

reimbursement rates for retail 

pharmacies under the Medicaid 

program,’’ and, subject to certain 

exceptions, prohibits CMS from 

‘‘[p]osting any AMP data on a public 

Web site or otherwise disclosing any 

AMP data to any individual or entities.’’ 

The preliminary injunction, however, 

does not enjoin implementation of the 

AMP final rule as it relates to the 

calculation of rebates for the Medicaid 

rebate program, or the disclosure of 

AMP data to States as necessary for the 

administration of that program. 

On March 14, 2008, in response to 

this litigation, CMS published an 

interim final rule with comment period 

to revise the definition of multiple 

source drug to better conform to the 

statutory definition of ‘‘multiple source 

drug’’ found in section 1927(k)(7) of the 

Act, and to inform the public of the 

procedures and practices the Agency 

would follow to ensure compliance with 

those statutory provisions. The 

subsequent final rule was published on 

October 7, 2008. The Plaintiffs, 

however, amended their filing with the 

Court contending that the revised 

multiple source drug definition and 

implementation procedures remained 

inconsistent with the statute. 

On July 15, 2008, the Medicare 

Improvements for Patients and 

Providers Act of 2008 (Pub. L. 110–275) 

(MIPPA) was enacted. Section 203 of 

MIPPA prohibited HHS from imposing 

FULs prior to October 1, 2009, for 

multiple source drugs under 

§ 447.514(b) as published in the July 17, 

2007, AMP final rule. In accordance 

with the law, CMS resumed publishing 

FULs for multiple source drugs, using 

the methodology in § 447.332 as in 

effect on December 31, 2006. The 

methodology in § 447.332 applied 

through September 30, 2009. Since the 

preliminary injunction was issued, CMS 

has been unable to implement certain 

provisions of the DRA (as implemented 

in the July 17, 2007 AMP final rule). As 

a result of the lawsuit, and subsequent 

preliminary injunction, CMS has been 

enjoined from implementing the AMPbased FULs that the DRA had required. 

However, manufacturers were not 

affected by the injunction and continue 

to calculate and report AMP for the 

purpose of Medicaid rebates, in 

accordance with the Determination of 

AMP as specified in the AMP final rule. 

Section 2503(a) of the Patient 

Protection and Affordable Care Act 

(Pub. L. 111–148, enacted on March 23, 

2010), amended section 1927(e) of the 

Act by revising the Federal upper 

reimbursement limit to be no less than 

175 percent of the weighted average 

(determined on the basis of utilization) 

of the most recently reported monthly 

AMPs for pharmaceutically and 

therapeutically equivalent multiple 

source drug products that are available 

for purchase by retail community 

pharmacies on a nationwide basis. It 

also amends section 1927(k) of the Act 

by revising the definitions of AMP, 

multiple source drug, and wholesaler. In 

addition, it adds to section 1927(k) of 

the Act the definition of the term ‘‘retail 

community pharmacy,’’ and eliminates 

the term ‘‘retail pharmacy class of 

trade.’’ The amendments made by 

section 2503(a) of the Patient Protection 

and Affordable Care Act, as amended by 

section 1101(c) of the Health Care and 

Education Reconciliation Act (Pub. L. 

111–152, enacted on March 30, 2010) 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 171 / Friday, September 3, 2010 / Proposed Rules 54075 

and section 202 of the FAA Air 

Transportation Modernization and 

Safety Improvement Act (Pub. L. 111– 

226, enacted on August 10, 2010), are 

effective October 1, 2010. 

II. Provisions of the Proposed 

Regulations 

In light of the lawsuit and preliminary 

injunction imposed by the Court and, in 

light of the changes in the relevant 

statutory language, CMS proposes the 

following revisions to the AMP final 

rule published on July 17, 2007: 

• Section 447.504, ‘‘Determination of 

AMP,’’ should be withdrawn in its 

entirety; 

• Section 447.514, ‘‘Upper limits for 

multiple source drugs,’’ should be 

withdrawn in its entirety; and 

• The definition of ‘‘multiple source 

drug’’ in § 447.502, ‘‘Definitions’’ (as it 

was amended by the Multiple Source 

Drug Rule published on October 7, 

2008), should be withdrawn. 

The terms ‘‘average manufacturer 

price’’ and ‘‘multiple source drug’’ would 

be defined by section 1927 of the Act, 

including changes made by section 2503 

of the Patient Protection and Affordable 

Care Act, as amended by the Health 

Care and Education Reconciliation Act, 

and the FAA Air Transportation 

Modernization and Safety Improvement 

Act. In particular, drug manufacturers 

would be advised to base their AMP 

calculations on the definitions set forth 

in section 1927 of the Act, instead of on 

the AMP and AMP-related definitions 

provided in existing regulations and 

guidance. 

CMS expects to develop regulations 

that will implement the provisions of 

section 2503 of the Patient Protection 

and Affordable Care Act. 

Additionally, there are three sections 

within the AMP final rule that make 

reference to the sections being proposed 

for withdrawal. Section 447.510 

‘‘Requirements for manufacturers’’, 

makes reference to § 447.504 

‘‘Determination of AMP’’, and § 447.512 

‘‘Drugs: Aggregate upper limits for 

payment’’, and § 447.518 ‘‘State plan 

requirements’’, make reference to 

§ 447.514 ‘‘Upper limits for multiple 

source drugs. We are proposing 

conforming regulatory amendments to 

those sections. 

III. Collection of Information 

Requirements 

This document does not impose any 

new information collection and 

recordkeeping requirements. The 

burden associated with the reporting 

requirements contained in § 447.510(a) 

are currently approved under OMB 

#0938–0578 with an expiration date of 

October 31, 2010. 

IV. Response to Comments 

Because of the large number of public 

comments we normally receive on 

Federal Register documents, we are not 

able to acknowledge or respond to them 

individually. We will consider all 

comments we receive by the date and 

time specified in the DATES section of 

this preamble, and, when we proceed 

with a subsequent document, we will 

respond to the comments in the 

preamble to that document. 

V. Regulatory Impact Statement 

We have examined the impact of this 

rule as required by Executive Order 

12866 on Regulatory Planning and 

Review (September 30, 1993) the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

(September 19, 1980, Pub. L. 96–354), 

section 1102(b) of the Social Security 

Act, section 202 of the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (March 

22, 1995; Pub. L. 104–4), Executive 

Order 13132 on Federalism (August 4, 

1999) and the Congressional Review Act 

(5 U.S.C. 804(2)). 

Executive Order 12866 directs 

agencies to assess all costs and benefits 

of available regulatory alternatives and, 

if regulation is necessary, to select 

regulatory approaches that maximize 

net benefits (including potential 

economic, environmental, public health 

and safety effects, distributive impacts, 

and equity). A regulatory impact 

analysis (RIA) must be prepared for 

major rules with economically 

significant effects ($100 million or more 

in any 1 year). This regulatory action 

withdraws those regulatory provisions 

that have been superseded by the 

Affordable Care Act. We do not expect 

that this proposed rule will have any 

economic effects. Therefore, this 

proposed rule is not considered an 

economically significant rule. 

The RFA requires agencies to analyze 

options for regulatory relief of small 

businesses. For purposes of the RFA, 

small entities include small businesses, 

nonprofit organizations, and small 

governmental jurisdictions. Most 

hospitals and most other providers and 

suppliers are small entities, either by 

nonprofit status or by having revenues 

of $7.0 million to $34.5 million in any 

1 year. Individuals and States are not 

included in the definition of a small 

entity. We are not preparing an analysis 

for the RFA because the Secretary has 

determined that this proposed rule will 

not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities. 

In addition, section 1102(b) of the Act 

requires us to prepare a regulatory 

impact analysis if a rule may have a 

significant impact on the operations of 

a substantial number of small rural 

hospitals. This analysis must conform to 

the provisions of section 603 of the 

RFA. For purposes of section 1102(b) of 

the Act, we define a small rural hospital 

as a hospital that is located outside of 

a Metropolitan Statistical Area for 

Medicare payment regulations and has 

fewer than 100 beds. We are not 

preparing an analysis for section 1102(b) 

of the Act because the Secretary has 

determined that this proposed rule will 

not have a significant impact on the 

operations of a substantial number of 

small rural hospitals. 

Section 202 of the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 also 

requires that agencies assess anticipated 

costs and benefits before issuing any 

rule whose mandates require spending 

in any 1 year of $100 million in 1995 

dollars, updated annually for inflation. 

In 2010, that threshold is approximately 

$135 million. This rule would have no 

consequential effect on State, local, or 

tribal governments or on the private 

sector. 

Executive Order 13132 establishes 

certain requirements that an agency 

must meet when it promulgates a 

proposed rule (and subsequent final 

rule) that imposes substantial direct 

requirement costs on State and local 

governments, preempts State law, or 

otherwise has Federalism implications. 

Since this regulation does not impose 

any costs on State or local governments, 

the requirements of Executive Order 

13132 are not applicable. 

In accordance with the provisions of 

Executive Order 12866, this regulation 

was reviewed by the Office of 

Management and Budget. 

List of Subjects in 42 CFR Part 447 

Accounting, Administrative practice 

and procedure, Drugs, Grant programs— 

health, Health facilities, Health 

professions, Medicaid, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Rural 

areas. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, the Centers for Medicare & 

Medicaid Services proposes to amend 

42 CFR chapter IV as set forth below: 

PART 447—PAYMENT FOR SERVICES 

1. The authority citation for part 447 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Sec. 1102 of the Social Security 

Act (42 U.S.C. 1302). 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
54076 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 171 / Friday, September 3, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

Subpart I—Payment for Drugs 

§ 447.502 [Amended] 

2. Section 447.502 is amended by 

removing the definition of ‘‘multiple 

source drug.’’ 

§ 447.504 [Removed and reserved] 

3. Section 447.504 is removed and 

reserved. 

4. Section 447.510 is amended by— 

A. Republishing paragraph (a) 

introductory text. 

B. Revising paragraphs (a)(1), (c)(2)(i), 

and (d)(2). 

The revisions read as follows: 

§ 447.510 Requirements for 

manufacturers. 

(a) Quarterly reports. A manufacturer 

must report product and pricing 

information for covered outpatient 

drugs to CMS not later than 30 days 

after the end of the rebate period. The 

quarterly pricing report must include: 

(1) AMP, calculated in accordance 

with section 1927 (k)(1) of the Social 

Security Act. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(2) * * * 

(i) A manufacturer’s recalculation of 

the base date AMP must only reflect the 

revisions to AMP as provided for in 

section 1927(k)(1) of the Social Security 

Act. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(2) Calculation of monthly AMP. 

Monthly AMP should be calculated 

based on section 1927(k)(1) of the Social 

Security Act, except the period covered 

should be based on monthly, as opposed 

to quarterly AMP sales. 

* * * * * 

5. Section 447.512 is amended by— 

A. Removing and reserving paragraph 

(a). 

B. Revising the introductory text of 

paragraph (b). 

C. Revising paragraph (c). 

The revisions read as follows: 

§ 447.512 Drugs: Aggregate upper limits of 

payment. 

(a) [Reserved] 

(b) Other drugs. The agency payments 

for brand name drugs certified in 

accordance with paragraph (c) of this 

section and drugs other than multiple 

source drugs for which a specific limit 

has been established must not exceed, 

in the aggregate, payments levels that 

the agency has determined by applying 

the lower of the—. 

* * * * * 

(c) Certification of brand name drugs. 

(1) The upper limit for payment for 

multiple source drugs for which specific 

limit has been established does not 

apply if a physician certifies in his or 

her own handwriting (or by an 

electronic alternative means approved 

by the Secretary) that a specific brand is 

medically necessary for a particular 

recipient. 

(2) The agency must decide what 

certification form and procedure are 

used. 

(3) A check-off box on a form is not 

acceptable but a notation like ‘‘brand 

necessary’’ is allowable. 

(4) The agency may allow providers to 

keep the certification forms if the forms 

will be available for inspection by the 

agency or HHS. 

§ 447.514 [Removed and reserved] 

5. Section 447.514 is removed and 

reserved. 

6. Section 447.518 is amended by: 

A. Revising paragraph (b)(1)(i). 

B. In paragraph (b)(2), removing the 

citations ‘‘§§ 447.512 and § 447.514’’ and 

adding citation ‘‘§ 447.512’’ in its place. 

The revision reads as follows: 

§ 447.518 State plan requirements, 

findings and assurances. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(i) In the aggregate, its Medicaid 

expenditures for multiple source drugs 

are in accordance with the established 

upper limits. 

* * * * * 

Authority: Catalog of Federal Domestic 

Assistance Program No. 93.778, Medical 

Assistance Program. 

Dated: August 18, 2010. 

Donald M. Berwick, 

Administrator, Centers for Medicare & 

Medicaid Services. 

Approved: August 31, 2010. 

Kathleen Sebelius, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2010–22115 Filed 9–2–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4120–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Federal Emergency Management 

Agency 

44 CFR Part 61 

[Docket ID: FEMA–2010–0021] 

RIN 1660–AA70 

National Flood Insurance Program, 

Policy Wording Correction 

AGENCY: Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, DHS. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: By this Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking, the Federal Emergency 

Management Agency (FEMA) is 

proposing a technical correction to the 

FEMA, Federal Insurance and 

Mitigation Administration, Standard 

Flood Insurance Policy regulations. In 

this proposed rule, FEMA intends to 

increase the clarity of one of the 

provisions of the Standard Flood 

Insurance Policy by adding in two 

unintentionally omitted words. 

DATES: Comments must be submitted on 

or before November 2, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by Docket ID: FEMA–2010– 

0021, by one of the following methods: 

Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

E-mail: FEMA-RULES@dhs.gov. 

Include Docket ID: FEMA–2010–0021 in 

the subject line of the message. 

Fax: (703) 483–2999. 

Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Office of 

Chief Counsel, Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, Room 835, 500 C 

Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472– 

3100. 

To avoid duplication, please use only 

one of these methods. All comments 

received will be posted without change 

to http://www.regulations.gov, including 

any personal information provided. For 

instructions on submitting comments, 

See the Public Participation portion of 

the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Edward L. Connor, Acting Federal 

Insurance and Mitigation Administrator, 

DHS/FEMA, 1800 South Bell Street, 

Arlington, VA 20598–3010. Phone: (202) 

646–3429. Facsimile: (202) 646–7970. 

E-mail: Edward.Connor@dhs.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Public Participation 

Interested persons are invited to 

participate in this rulemaking by 

submitting written data, views, or 

arguments on all aspects of this Notice 

of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM). 

Comments that will provide the most 

assistance to the Federal Emergency 

Management Agency (FEMA) in 

developing this rule will refer to a 

specific provision of the NPRM, explain 

the reason for any comments, and 

include other information or authority 

that supports such comments. All 

comments received will be posted, 

without change, to http:// 

www.regulations.gov and will include 

any personal information you have 

provided. If you submit a comment, 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1