[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 183 (Wednesday, September 21, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 64894]
[FR Doc No: 2016-22646]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #2

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER16-341-001; ER16-343-001; ER16-498-001; ER16-499-
001; ER16-500-001; ER16-645-001.
    Applicants: RE Astoria LLC, RE Astoria 2 LLC, RE Mustang LLC, RE
Mustang 3 LLC, RE Mustang 4 LLC, RE Barren Ridge 1 LLC.
    Description: Supplement to June 28, 2016 Triennial Market Power
Analysis for Southwest Region of the Recurrent MBR Sellers.
    Filed Date: 9/14/16.
    Accession Number: 20160914-5102.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/5/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2591-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Section 205(d) Rate Filing: GIA and Distribution
Service Agreement Commerce Refuse to Energy Authority to be effective
1/1/2017.
    Filed Date: 9/14/16.
    Accession Number: 20160914-5077.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/5/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2592-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Section 205(d) Rate Filing: Amended SGIA with SS San
Antonio West, LLC to be effective 11/15/2016.
    Filed Date: 9/14/16.
    Accession Number: 20160914-5094.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/5/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2593-000.
    Applicants: Land O'Lakes, Inc.
    Description: Compliance filing: Land O Lakes Revised Tariff Filing
to be effective 11/13/2016.
    Filed Date: 9/14/16.
    Accession Number: 20160914-5104.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/5/16.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: September 14, 2016.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-22646 Filed 9-20-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 107 (Friday, June 3, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33770-33772]
[FR Doc No: 2022-11931]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following Complaints
and Compliance filings in EL Dockets:

    Docket Numbers: EL22-60-000.
    Applicants: Coalition of MISO Transmission Customers v.
Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Complaint of Coalition of MISO Transmission Customers.
    Filed Date: 5/26/22.
    Accession Number: 20220526-5257.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 6/15/22.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3050-009; ER10-3053-009.
    Applicants: Whitewater Hill Wind Partners, LLC, Cabazon Wind
Partners, LLC.
    Description: Supplement to March 3, 2022 Notice of Non-Material
Change in Status of Cabazon Wind Partners, LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 5/26/22.
    Accession Number: 20220526-5192.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 6/16/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2051-003.
    Applicants: Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, New York Independent
System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Compliance filing: New York Independent System
Operator, Inc. submits tariff filing per 35: Niagara Mohawk Order No.
864 Compliance Filing in Response to March 31 Order to be effective 1/
27/2020.
    Filed Date: 5/27/22.
    Accession Number: 20220527-5055.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 6/17/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-1223-002.
    Applicants: Tucson Electric Power Company.
    Description: Compliance filing: TEP Order 864 Compliance Filing to
be effective 1/27/2020.
    Filed Date: 5/27/22.
    Accession Number: 20220527-5121.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 6/17/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-1955-001.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: 2022-05-27_Errata to Att FF Upgrades
related to Competitive Transmission Process to be effective 7/25/2022.
    Filed Date: 5/27/22.
    Accession Number: 20220527-5221.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 6/17/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-1966-000.

    Applicants: Arizona Public Service Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Amendment to Rate Schedule
Nos. 221 and 222 to be effective 7/26/2022.
    Filed Date: 5/26/22.
    Accession Number: 20220526-5230.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 6/16/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-1967-000.
    Applicants: Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: DEC-WCU RS 545 Cancellation to be
effective 7/26/2022.
    Filed Date: 5/26/22.
    Accession Number: 20220526-5233.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 6/16/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-1968-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2022-05-27_SA 2465 Rock
Aetna Power-Northern States Power 3rd Revised GIA (G621) to be
effective 5/20/2022.
    Filed Date: 5/27/22.
    Accession Number: 20220527-5022.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 6/17/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-1969-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 3211R4 North Iowa Municipal
Electric Cooperative Association NITSA and NOA to be effective 5/1/
2022.
    Filed Date: 5/27/22.
    Accession Number: 20220527-5047.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 6/17/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-1970-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Original NSA, Service
Agreement No. 6482; Queue No. AD1-119 to be effective 4/27/2022.
    Filed Date: 5/27/22.
    Accession Number: 20220527-5054.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 6/17/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-1971-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Notice of Cancellation Re: SA No.
5420 and 5421 NITSAs among PJM and NRG to be effective 6/1/2022.
    Filed Date: 5/27/22.
    Accession Number: 20220527-5125.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 6/17/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-1972-000.
    Applicants: Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: DEC-NCEMC SA 210 NITSA to be
effective 5/1/2022.
    Filed Date: 5/27/22.
    Accession Number: 20220527-5132.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 6/17/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-1973-000.
    Applicants: FirstEnergy Service Company, PJM Interconnection,
L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: FirstEnergy Service Company
submits tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: ATSI Submits Revised IA No.
3993 to be effective 7/27/2022.
    Filed Date: 5/27/22.
    Accession Number: 20220527-5145.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 6/17/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-1974-000.
    Applicants: Evergy Kansas Central, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revision, Formula Rate
Agreements, Common Stock to be effective 8/1/2022.
    Filed Date: 5/27/22.
    Accession Number: 20220527-5149.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 6/17/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-1975-000.
    Applicants: Evergy Kansas Central, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Update Common Stock Section
to be effective 8/1/2022.
    Filed Date: 5/27/22.
    Accession Number: 20220527-5154.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 6/17/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-1976-000.
    Applicants: Evergy Generating, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revision, Appendix A,
Purchase Power Agreement to be effective 8/1/2022.
    Filed Date: 5/27/22.
    Accession Number: 20220527-5159.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 6/17/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-1977-000.
    Applicants: Otter Tail Power Company.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Notice of Cancellation of Operating
Services Agreement No. 57 with DLPU to be effective 3/4/2022.
    Filed Date: 5/27/22.
    Accession Number: 20220527-5163.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 6/17/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-1978-000.
    Applicants: American Electric Power Service Corporation, PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: American Electric Power
Service Corporation submits tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: AEP
Submits IA No. 6385 to be effective 5/1/2022.
    Filed Date: 5/27/22.
    Accession Number: 20220527-5164.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 6/17/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-1979-000.
    Applicants: El Paso Electric Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Depreciation Rate Update
Associated with Rate Schedule No. 18 to be effective 8/1/2022.
    Filed Date: 5/27/22.
    Accession Number: 20220527-5182.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 6/17/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-1980-000.
    Applicants: Deuel Harvest Wind Energy LLC.
    Description: Initial rate filing: Deuel Harvest Wind Reactive
Service Tariff Filing to be effective 8/1/2022.
    Filed Date: 5/27/22.
    Accession Number: 20220527-5185.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 6/17/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-1981-000.
    Applicants: Southwestern Public Service Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: SPS-GSEC-RBEC-IA Hartmoore
728--0.0.0 to be effective 7/26/2022.
    Filed Date: 5/27/22.
    Accession Number: 20220527-5194,
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 6/17/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-1982-000.
    Applicants: Great Prairie Wind, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Great Prairie Wind, LLC
Application for Market-Based Rate Authority to be effective 7/27/2022.
    Filed Date: 5/27/22.
    Accession Number: 20220527-5204.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 6/17/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-1983-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2022-05-27_Distribution of
ZDB funds for excess auction revenue in PRA to be effective 6/1/2022.
    Filed Date: 5/27/22.
    Accession Number: 20220527-5215.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 6/17/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-1984-000.
    Applicants: Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2022-05-27 NSP-GRE-CIAC-Lena
Tap-698-0.0.0 to be effective 5/28/2022.
    Filed Date: 5/27/22.
    Accession Number: 20220527-5238.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 6/17/22.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying
the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/

docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866)
208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: May 27, 2022.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-11931 Filed 6-2-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 30 (Tuesday, February 16, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 7718-7720]
[FR Doc No: 2016-03091]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2016-0026]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone, Block Island Wind Farm; Rhode Island Sound, RI

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish a 500-yard safety zone
around each of five locations where the Block Island Wind Farm (BIWF)
wind turbine generator (WTG) towers, nacelles, blades and subsea cables
will be installed in the navigable waters of the Rhode Island Sound,
RI, from April 1 to October 31, 2016. These safety zones are intended
to safeguard mariners from the hazards associated with construction of
the BIWF. Vessels would be prohibited from entering into, transiting
through, mooring, or anchoring within these safety zones while
construction vessels and associated equipment are present at any of the
BIWF WTG sites, unless authorized by the Captain of the Port (COTP),
Southeastern New England or the COTP's designated representative. We
invited your comments on this proposed rulemaking.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before March 17, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2016-0026 using the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public Participation and Request for
Comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further
instructions on submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
proposed rulemaking, contact Mr. Edward G. LeBlanc, Chief of the
Waterways Management Division at Coast Guard Sector Southeastern New
England, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Acronyms

BIWF Block Island Wind Farm
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of The Port
DHS Department of Homeland Security
E.O. Executive order
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
NTM Notice To Mariners
Pub. L. Public Law
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code
WTG Wind Turbine Generator

II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis

    On January 6, 2016, the Coast Guard was notified by Deepwater Wind
Inc, developer of the Block Island Wind Farm, that the second phase of
construction activities are planned from April 1 to October 31, 2016,
to install turbines, nacelles, blades, and subsea cables at each of the
five WTG sites. The Coast Guard published a safety zone regulation,
similar to this proposed rule, which applied to the first phase
(installation of foundations) of construction of the BIWF in 2015. The
Coast Guard is now proposing a similar rule for the second phase of
BIWF construction.
    This rule is necessary to provide for the safety of life and
navigation, for construction and support vessels, BIWF workers,
mariners, and the boating public during construction activities in the
vicinity of the BIWF in Rhode Island Sound, RI.
    The legal basis for the proposed rule is 33 U.S.C., 1231; 50 U.S.C.
191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5 Department of Homeland
Security Delegation No. 0170.1, which collectively authorize the Coast
Guard to establish safety zones.

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Coast Guard proposes to establish a 500-yard safety zone around
each of five locations where the BIWF WTG towers, nacelles, blades, and
subsea cables will be installed in the navigable waters of the Rhode
Island Sound, RI, from 1 April to 31 October 2016. Locations of these
platforms are:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Platform                  Latitude             Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
WTG 1........................  41[deg]7'32.74'' N.  71[deg]30'27.04'' W.
WTG 2........................  41[deg]7'11.57'' N.  71[deg]30'50.22'' W.
WTG 3........................  41[deg]6'52.96'' N.  71[deg]31'16.18'' W.
WTG 4........................  41[deg]6'36.54'' N.  71[deg]31'44.62'' W.
WTG 5........................  41[deg]6'22.79'' N.  71[deg]32'15.50'' W.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    These safety zones are intended to safeguard mariners from the
hazards associated with construction of the BIWF, and are of similar
dimensions and duration as safety zones established in 2015 for the
same purpose, during the first phase of construction of the BIWF.
Vessels will be prohibited from entering into, transiting through,
mooring, or anchoring within these safety zones while construction
vessels and associated equipment are present unless authorized by the
COTP, Southeastern New England or the COTP's designated representative.

IV. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and E.O.s related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based
on a number of these statutes and E.O.s, and we discuss First Amendment
rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    E.O.s 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and
benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits.
E.O. 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and
benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. This NPRM has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action,'' under E.O. 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM has not
been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.
    This regulatory action determination is based on a number of
factors. The safety zones are only 500 yards in diameter, centered on
each of five WTG locations, and enforced only when construction vessels
are on scene or when construction activities are taking place. Also,
construction of the five WTG sites is sequential, not concurrent, so
that construction vessels and activities (and hence, safety zones) are
present at only one or two sites at any given time. The Coast Guard
will publicize these safety zones well in advance via the Local Notice
to Mariners, and Deepwater Wind will update its Web site daily to keep
mariners informed of what safety zones, if any, may be enforced.
Lastly, safety zones of the same size and duration were implemented for
the first phase of the BIWF construction in 2015 with no significant
impact to mariners or small entities.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this
proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit
these safety zones may be small entities, for the reasons stated in
section IV.A above this proposed rule would not have a significant
economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect
your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you
have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that
question or complain about this proposed rule or any policy or action
of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would not call for new collection of information
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under E.O. 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and
have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in E.O. 13132.
    Also, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
E.O. 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or
Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section above.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023-01 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 made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a
category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule
involves safety zones that would prohibit entry within 500 yards of
each WTG site of the BIWF while construction vessels and associated
equipment are present at any of the BIWF WTG sites and maybe

categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of
Figure 2-1 of Commandant Instruction M16475.lD. A preliminary
environmental analysis checklist is available in the docket where
indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may
lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this
proposed rule.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places, or vessels.

V. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking,
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation.
    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate
instructions.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the
docket, you may review a Privacy Act notice regarding the Federal
Docket Management System in the March 24, 2005, issue of the Federal
Register (70 FR 15086).
    Documents mentioned in this notice, and all public comments, are in
our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by
following that Web site's instructions. Additionally, if you go to the
online docket and sign up for email alerts, you will be notified when
comments are posted or a final rule is published.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for Part 165 reads as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1,
6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T0026 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T0026  Safety Zone, Block Island Wind Farm; Rhode Island
Sound, RI.

    (a) Location. Areas within a 500-yard radius of the following five
positions are safety zones:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Platform                  Latitude             Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
WTG 1........................  41[deg]7'32.74'' N.  71[deg]30'27.04'' W.
WTG 2........................  41[deg]7'11.57'' N.  71[deg]30'50.22'' W.
WTG 3........................  41[deg]6'52.96'' N.  71[deg]31'16.18'' W.
WTG 4........................  41[deg]6'36.54'' N.  71[deg]31'44.62'' W.
WTG 5........................  41[deg]6'22.79'' N.  71[deg]32'15.50'' W.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b) Enforcement period. From April 1 to October 31, 2016, vessels
will be prohibited from entering into any of these safety zones, when
enforced, during construction activity of five Block Island Wind Farm
(BIWF) wind turbine generators (WTG) located in the positions listed in
2(a) above.
    (c) Definitions. The following definitions apply to this section:
    (1) Designated representative. A ``designated representative'' is
any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer of the U.S.
Coast Guard who has been designated by the Captain of the Port, Sector
Southeastern New England (COTP), to act on his or her behalf.
    (d) Regulations. (1) The general regulations contained in 33 CFR
165.23 as well as the following regulations apply to the safety zones
established in conjunction with the construction of the BIWF; Rhode
Island Sound, RI. These regulations may be enforced for the duration of
construction.
    (2) Vessels must not enter into, transit through, moor, or anchor
in these safety zones during periods of enforcement unless authorized
by the COTP, Southeastern New England or the COTP's designated
representative. Vessels permitted to transit must operate at a no-wake
speed, in a manner which will not endanger construction vessels or
associated equipment.
    (3) Failure to comply with a lawful direction from the COTP,
Southeastern New England or the COTP's designated representative may
result in expulsion from the area, citation for failure to comply, or
both.

    Dated: January 22, 2016.
J.T. Kondratowicz,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Southeastern New
England.
[FR Doc. 2016-03091 Filed 2-12-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 176 (Monday, September 12, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 56128-56130]
[FR Doc No: 2011-23179]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

17 CFR Chapter II

[Release Nos. 33-9257; 34-65262; 39-2479; IA-3271; IC-29781; File No.
S7-36-11]

Retrospective Review of Existing Regulations

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission.

ACTION: Request for information.

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

SUMMARY: On July 11, 2011, the President issued Executive Order 13579,
``Regulation and Independent Regulatory Agencies,'' which, among other
things, states that independent regulatory agencies, no less than
executive agencies, should promote the goal, set forth in Executive
Order 13563 of January 18, 2011, of a regulatory system that protects
``public health, welfare, safety, and our environment while promoting
economic growth, innovation, competitiveness, and job creation.'' In
furtherance of its ongoing efforts to update regulations to reflect
market developments and changes in the regulatory landscape, and in
light of Executive Order 13579, the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') invites interested members of the public to submit
comments to assist the Commission in considering the development of a
plan for the retrospective review of its regulations.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or by: October 6, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/other.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number S7-36-11 on the subject line; or

     Use the Federal eRulemaking Portal (http://www.regulations.gov). Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number S7-36-11. This file number
should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help us
process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one
method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's
Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/other.shtml). Comments are
also available for Web site 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. All
comments received will be posted without change; we do not edit
personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit
only information that you wish to make available publicly.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert G. Bagnall, Attorney-Fellow,
Office of the General Counsel,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background--Current Commission Processes for Retrospective Analysis of
Existing Regulations

    Because today's financial markets are dynamic and fast-moving, the
regulations affecting those markets and participants in these markets
must be reviewed over time and revised as necessary so that the
regulations continue to fulfill the Commission's mission. The
Commission has long had in place formal and informal processes for the
review of existing rules to assess the rules' continued utility and
effectiveness in light of continuing evolution of the securities
markets and changes in the securities laws and regulatory priorities.
Key examples of the ongoing processes of the Commission and staff for
review of existing rules include the following:
     The Commission and staff review existing regulations
retrospectively as part of studies of broad substantive program areas.
For example, in March 2011, the Commission initiated a broad review of
offering and reporting requirements affecting issuers. The Commission
posted a regulatory review Web page seeking suggestions from the public
on ``modifying, streamlining, expanding, or repealing existing rules to
better promote economic growth, innovation, competitiveness and job
creation'' consistent with our mandates to protect investors, maintain
fair, orderly, and efficient markets, and facilitate capital
formation.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See http://www.sec.gov/spotlight/regulatoryreviewcomments.shtml.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Consistent with section 610(a) of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, the Commission annually reviews each of its rules that
has become final within the past ten years. In connection with that
review, the Commission publishes a list of the rules scheduled to be
reviewed by the Commission staff during the next twelve months.\2\ The
Commission's stated policy is to review all such final rules to assess
their continued utility with a view to identifying those rules in need
of modification or even rescission.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See, e.g., Regulatory Flexibility Agenda, Securities Act
Release No. 9194 (March 3, 2011), 76 FR 40208 (July 7, 2011).
    \3\ When the Commission implemented the Regulatory Flexibility
Act in 1980, it stated that it ``intend[ed] to conduct a broader
review [than that required by that Act], with a view to identifying
those rules in need of modification or even rescission.'' Securities
Act Release No. 6302 (Mar. 20, 1981), 46 FR 19251 (Mar. 30, 1981).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     The Commission and staff frequently receive and consider
suggestions to review existing rules through various types of
communications, ranging from formal petitions for rulemaking to
informal correspondence from investors, investor and industry groups,
Congress, fellow regulators, the bar and the public.
     The Commission and staff frequently discuss the need to
revisit existing rules through formal and informal public engagement,
including advisory committees, roundtables, town hall meetings,
speeches, conferences and other meetings.
     The Commission staff may identify existing regulations
that may merit review through its compliance inspection and examination
functions, enforcement investigations, and the receipt of requests for
exemptive relief or Commission or staff guidance.
     A significant portion of the Commission's rulemaking
activity already involves the consideration of changes to existing
rules. Commission staff, in preparing rulemaking proposals, routinely
consider related existing rules and assess whether to recommend changes
to, or the elimination of, those existing rules.

Executive Order 13579

    On July 11, 2011, the President signed Executive Order 13579,
``Regulation and Independent Regulatory Agencies.'' The Executive Order
states that independent regulatory agencies, to facilitate the periodic
review of existing significant regulations, ``should consider how best
to promote retrospective analysis of rules that may be outmoded,
ineffective, insufficient, or excessively burdensome, and to modify,
streamline, expand, or repeal them in accordance with what has been
learned. The review of existing rules ``should also consider
strengthening, complementing, or modernizing rules where necessary or
appropriate--including, if relevant, undertaking new rulemaking.'' \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Memorandum for the Heads of Independent Regulatory Agencies,
M-11-28, ``Executive Order 13579, ``Regulation and Independent
Regulatory Agencies'' (July 22, 2011), http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/memoranda/2011/m11-28.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Executive Order 13579 also states that, within 120 days, each
independent agency ``should develop and release to the public a plan,
consistent with law and reflecting its resources and regulatory
priorities and processes, under which the agency will periodically
review its existing significant regulations to determine whether any
such regulations should be modified, streamlined, expanded, or repealed
so as to make the agency's regulatory program more effective or less
burdensome in achieving the regulatory objectives.''

Request for Comments

    In furtherance of its ongoing efforts to update regulations to
reflect market developments and changes in the regulatory landscape,
and in light of Executive Order 13579, the Commission invites public
comments on the development of a plan for retrospective review of
existing significant regulations. The Commission welcomes general
comments on what the scope and elements of such a plan should be. In
addition, the Commission encourages commenters to respond to the
questions below:
    1. What factors should the Commission consider in selecting and
prioritizing rules for review?
    2. How often should the Commission review existing rules?
    3. Should different rules be reviewed at different intervals? If
so, which categories of rules should be reviewed more or less
frequently, and on what basis?
    4. To what extent does relevant data exist that the Commission
should consider in selecting and prioritizing rules for review and in
reviewing rules, and how should the Commission assess such data in
these processes? To what extent should these processes include

reviewing financial economic literature or conducting empirical
studies? How can our review processes obtain and consider data and
analyses that address the benefits of our rules in preventing fraud or
other harms to our financial markets and in otherwise protecting
investors?
    5. What can the Commission do to modify, streamline, or expand its
regulatory review processes?
    6. How should the Commission improve public outreach and increase
public participation in the rulemaking process?
    7. Is there any other information that the Commission should
consider in developing and implementing a preliminary plan for
retrospective review of regulations?
    Please note that the Commission is not soliciting comment in this
notice on specific existing Commission rules to be considered for
review. Any comments regarding a currently pending Commission rule
proposal, including proposed amendments to existing rules, should be
directed to the comment file for the relevant rule proposal.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See http://www.sec.gov/rules/submitcomments.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We anticipate that any processes set forth in a Commission plan
will reflect constraints imposed by limits on resources and competing
priorities.\6\ Accordingly, the Commission encourages commenters to
consider what additional steps, if any, beyond the Commission's current
review processes could be implemented effectively and efficiently in
light of the Commission's overall resource constraints and
responsibilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Executive Order 13579 states that an agency's plan should
reflect ``its resources and regulatory priorities and processes.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission is issuing this request for information solely for
information and program-planning purposes. The Commission will consider
the comments submitted and may use them as appropriate in the
preparation of a retrospective review plan but does not anticipate
responding to each comment submitted. While responses to this request
do not bind the Commission to any further actions, all submissions will
be made publicly available on [sec.gov or regulations.gov].

    By the Commission.

    Dated: September 6, 2011.

Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-23179 Filed 9-9-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


  MacroButton macIb01 i

EPA BIOPESTICIDES AND POLLUTION PREVENTION DIVISION COMPANY NOTICE OF
FILING FOR PESTICIDE PETITIONS PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER

EPA Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division contact: [Ann Sibold
703 305-6502]

INSTRUCTIONS:  Please utilize this outline in preparing the pesticide
petition.  In cases where the outline element does not apply, please
insert “NA-Remove” and maintain the outline. Please do not change
the margins, font, or format in your pesticide petition. Simply replace
the instructions that appear in green, i.e., “[insert company
name],” with the information specific to your action.

SUBMISSION: Email the completed template to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
TEMPLATE:

[Bee Vectoring Technology Inc.

[6F8508]

	EPA has received a pesticide petition ([6F8508]) from [Amy Plato
Roberts, Technology Sciences Group, Inc., 1150 18th Street., NW Suite
1000, Washington, DC 20036, Agent for Bee Vectoring Technology Inc.],
[4160 Sladeview Crescent #7, Mississauga, ON L5L 0A1 Canada] requesting,
pursuant to section 408(d) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d), to amend 40 CFR part 180 to establish an
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for  microbial pesticide
[Clonostachys rosea strain CR-7].

Pursuant to section 408(d)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA, as amended, [Amy Plato
Roberts, Technology Sciences Group, Inc., Agent for Bee Vectoring
Technology Inc.,] has submitted the following summary of information,
data, and arguments in support of their pesticide petition. This summary
was prepared by [Amy Plato Roberts, Technology Sciences Group, Inc.,
Agent for Bee Vectoring Technology Inc.] and EPA has not fully evaluated
the merits of the pesticide petition. The summary may have been edited
by EPA if the terminology used was unclear, the summary contained
extraneous material, or the summary unintentionally made the reader
conclude that the findings reflected EPA’s position and not the
position of the petitioner.

I. [Bee Vectoring Technology Inc.] Petition Summary

	[6F8508]

Product Name and Proposed Use Practices

[Product Names:	CR-7 Technical (50% active ingredient (ai)); Technical
Grade Active Ingredient (TGAI) – EPA File Symbol 90641-R.

Vectorite with CR-7 (5% ai; End Use Product (EP)) – EPA File Symbol
90641-E.

Proposed Use Practices: CR-7 Technical is a 50% ai (TGAI) of
Clonostachys rosea strain CR-7 and is proposed for manufacturing use
only, for further formulation into registered end-use products.

Vectorite with CR-7 is a 5% ai formulated EP for application via bee
vectoring (using commercial honey bees or bumble bees) during the bloom
period of certain growing plants for the purposes of disease control and
prevention.  Application by bee vectoring is a very efficient method of
application that directly delivers a low dose of the active ingredient.
Bees walk through a tray of the light, powdered EP on the way out of the
hive and deliver the product to the crop flowers, a common portal of
pathogen entry into the plant.]

B. Product Identity/Chemistry

	1. Identity of the pesticide and corresponding residues. [Clonostachys
rosea strain CR-7 (CAS No. Not applicable).  Clonostachys rosea is
ubiquitous in the environment and has been identified in tissue from a
variety of terrestrial plants, aquatic plants and all types of soils
(MRID No. 499492-10).  Information regarding the name, identity and
composition has been submitted to EPA (MRID No. 499492-01).

Clonostachys rosea is a beneficial endophyte that is used to control and
prevent spore production of Botrytis sp. and other similar plant
diseases in plant tissues and is used to enhance the plant’s natural
resistance (induced systemic resistance (ISR)).  Hyphae have been found
to coil around, penetrate and grow inside the hyphae and conidia of
Botrytis sp. (MRID No. 499492-01).]

	2. Magnitude of residues at the time of harvest and method used to
determine the residue. [NA--Remove]

	3. A statement of why an analytical method of detecting and measuring
the levels of the pesticide residue are not needed. [An analytical
method for residues is not applicable.  It is expected that, when used
as proposed, Clonostachys rosea strain CR-7, would not result in
residues that are of toxicological concern.]

C. Mammalian Toxicological Profile

[Studies to evaluate the safety of the active ingredient to mammals were
conducted and are summarized as follows:

Acute Pulmonary Toxicity/Pathogenicity Study in Rats (OCSPP 885.3150):
A Pulmonary Toxicity / Pathogenicity study conducted to evaluate the
potential effects of a single high dose pulmonary exposure to pure
Clonostachys rosea strain CR-7 indicated the test material is low in
toxicity following acute exposure to the respiratory system (MRID No.
499492-02).  In this study, 36 male and 36 female rats were separated
into 4 groups: Group I, untreated, housed in a separate room (6/sex),
Group II, shelf controls, housed with Group IV (4/sex), Group III,
inactive test material (8/sex), and Group IV, test material, treated
(18/sex).  Treated rats received by tracheal injection, a single dose of
0.3 ml Clonostachys rosea strain CR-7 with counts of 3.1 x 108 colony
forming units per milliliter (CFU /ml), or 9.3 x 107 CFU/rat.  Rats were
observed often on the day of dosing and once daily thereafter for 21
days.  Interim sacrifices of treated rats were conducted on days 0, 3,
7, 14, and 21, and blood and tissue samples were collected from these
subjects at each sacrifice and cultured to quantify the clearance
pattern of the microbe.   There were no abnormal health observations and
no abnormalities identified during necropsy.  The test organism was not
detected in any tissues at any time point, and was considered cleared
from all tissues and blood by day 21.  The test substance Clonostachys
rosea strain CR-7 was determined to be non-toxic following tracheal
injection exposure in a single dose of 9.3 x 107 CFU/rat.

Acute Oral Toxicity (OCSPP 870.1100):  An acute oral toxicity study
conducted to evaluate the potential effects of a limit dose of CR-7
Technical (50% ai) indicated the test material is low in acute toxicity
following oral exposure (MRID No. 499492-03).  Female albino rats
received a dose of 5,000 mg/kg CR-7 Technical by oral gavage and were
monitored for effects for two weeks.  No mortality occurred during the
study and the rats exhibited no clinical signs of toxicity.  All animals
gained weight each week.  The acute oral LD50 for CR-7 Technical (50%
ai) was identified as > 5,000 mg/kg in female albino rats (Toxicity
Category IV).

An acute oral toxicity study conducted to evaluate the potential effects
of a limit dose of the formulated end-use product Vectorite with CR-7
(5% ai) indicated the test material is low in acute toxicity following
oral exposure (MRID No. 499493-02).  Female albino rats received a dose
of 5,000 mg/kg Vectorite with CR-7 by oral gavage and were monitored for
effects for two weeks.  No mortality occurred during the study and the
rats exhibited no clinical signs of toxicity.  All animals gained weight
each week.  The acute oral LD50 for Vectorite with CR-7 (5% ai) was
identified as > 5,000 mg/kg in female albino rats (Toxicity Category
IV).

Acute Dermal Toxicity (OCSPP 870.1200): An acute dermal toxicity study
conducted to evaluate the potential effects of a limit dose of CR-7
Technical (50% ai) indicated the test material is low in acute toxicity
following dermal exposure (MRID No. 499492-04).  Male and female albino
rats received a single dose of 5,050 mg/kg CR-7 Technical, moistened
with deionized water and applied to intact skin. No mortality occurred
during the study and the rats exhibited no clinical signs of toxicity or
signs of dermal irritation at any time throughout the study.  All
animals gained weight each week.  The acute oral LD50 for CR-7 Technical
(50% ai) was identified as > 5,050 mg/kg in female albino rats (Toxicity
Category IV).

An acute dermal toxicity study conducted to evaluate the potential
effects of a limit dose of the formulated end-use product Vectorite with
CR-7 (5% ai) indicated the test material is low in acute toxicity
following dermal exposure (MRID No. 499493-03).  Male and female albino
rats received a single dose of 5,050 mg/kg Vectorite with CR-7,
moistened with deionized water and applied to intact skin. No mortality
occurred during the study and the rats exhibited no clinical signs of
toxicity or signs of dermal irritation at any time throughout the study.
 All animals gained weight each week.  The acute oral LD50 for Vectorite
with CR-7 (5% ai) was identified as > 5,050 mg/kg in female albino rats
(Toxicity Category IV).

Acute Inhalation Toxicity Study in Rats (OCSPP 870.1300):  An acute
inhalation toxicity study was to be conducted to evaluate the potential
effects of a limit dose of the formulated end-use product Vectorite with
CR-7 (5% ai); however, the test facility was not able to obtain a
respirable particle size and the study was terminated (MRID No.
499493-04).  It was concluded that Vectorite with CR-7 cannot be
aerosolized to obtain an appropriate particle size to determine the
acute toxicity potential in rats.  Regardless, based on the results of
the Acute Pulmonary Toxicity / Pathogenicity Study in Rats (MRID No.
499492-02) and the fact that there is no association between
Clonostachys rosea and inhalation toxicity in literature search (MRID
No. 499492-10), it is expected that neither the active ingredient nor
the formulated end-use product would be toxic via the inhalation route
of exposure.

Primary Eye Irritation (OCSPP 870.2400):  A primary eye irritation study
on rabbits with CR-7 Technical (50% ai) indicated the test material is
minimally irritating based on a 48-hour exposure (MRID No. 499492-05).
Two male and one female albino rabbits received a dose of 100 mg of CR-7
Technical placed into the conjunctival sac of the right eye of each
animal.  All treated eyes were washed with room temperature deionized
water for one minute after recording the 24-hour observation.  There
were no positive effects exhibited in any eyes at 48 hours after
treatment.  CR-7 Technical (50% ai) is rated as minimally irritating
(Toxicity Category III).

A primary eye irritation study on rabbits with the formulated end-use
product Vectorite with CR-7 (5% ai) indicated the test material is
minimally irritating based on a 24-hour exposure (MRID No. 499493-05).
Two male and one female albino rabbits received a dose of 100 mg of
Vectorite with CR-7 placed into the conjunctival sac of the right eye of
each animal.  All treated eyes were washed with room temperature
deionized water for one minute after recording the 24-hour observation.
There were no positive effects exhibited in any eyes at 24 hours after
treatment.  Vectorite with CR-7 (5% ai) is rated as minimally irritating
(Toxicity Category IV).

Primary Dermal Irritation (OCSPP 870.2500):  A primary dermal irritation
study on rabbits with CR-7 Technical (50% ai) indicated the test
material is not irritating based on a 72-hour exposure (MRID No.
499492-06).  One male and two female albino rabbits received a dose of
500 mg of Vectorite with CR-7 moistened with deionized water and covered
with semi-permeable dressing.  The test substance was in contact with
skin for 4 hours.  There were no observations of dermal irritation at 1,
24, 48 and 72 hours after unwrapping.  CR-7 Technical (50% ai) is rated
as non-irritating (Toxicity Category IV).

A primary dermal irritation study on rabbits with the formulated end-use
product Vectorite with CR-7 (5% ai) indicated the test material is not
irritating based on a 72-hour exposure (MRID No. 499493-06).  Two male
and one female albino rabbits received a dose of 500 mg of Vectorite
with CR-7 moistened with deionized water and covered with semi-permeable
dressing.  The test substance was in contact with skin for 4 hours.
There were no observations of dermal irritation at 1, 24, 48 and 72
hours after unwrapping.  Vectorite with CR-7 (5% ai) is rated as
non-irritating (Toxicity Category IV).

7.	Hypersensitivity Incidents (OCSPP 885.3400):   The registrant has
noted that no incidents of hypersensitivity or any other adverse effects
have occurred through the research, development or testing of the active
ingredient and its related end-use product.  Should any incidents occur,
they will be reported per FIFRA Section 6(a)(2) (MRID No. 499492-10).

Literature searches have demonstrated that there are no reports of
ecological or human health hazards caused by Clonostachys rosea strains.
It does not produce recognized toxins, enzymes, or virulence factors
normally associated with mammalian invasiveness or toxicity.   The
results of toxicity testing show there is no risk to human health from
the active ingredient.  Clonostachys rosea strain CR-7 is not toxic,
pathogenic, infective or irritating to mammals.]

D. Aggregate Exposure

	1. Dietary exposure.

	i. Food. [Dietary exposure from use of Clonostachys rosea strain CR-7,
as proposed, is minimal.  The intended use of Clonostachys rosea strain
CR-7 is application via bee vectoring (using commercial honey bees or
bumble bees) during the bloom period of certain growing plants for the
purposes of disease control and prevention.  Formulated end-use products
with this active ingredient are applied at very low use rates which
would not be expected to increase levels of the microbe above natural
levels (MRID No. 499492-10).

The results of toxicity testing indicate there is no risk to human
health or the environment from Clonostachys rosea strain CR-7. There are
no reports of ecological or human health hazards caused by this
microorganism. It does not produce recognized toxins, enzymes, or
virulence factors normally associated with mammalian invasiveness or
toxicity.  The absence of acute toxicity or pathogenicity in laboratory
animals demonstrates the benign nature of this strain.]

	ii. Drinking water. [Similarly, exposure to humans from residues of
Clonostachys rosea strain CR-7 in consumed drinking water would be
unlikely.  Potential exposure to surface water would be negligible and
exposure to drinking water (well or ground water) would be impossible to
measure.   Clonostachys rosea is ubiquitous in the environment and has
been identified in tissue from a variety of terrestrial plants, aquatic
plants and all types of soils (MRID No. 499492-10).

The intended use of Clonostachys rosea strain CR-7 is application via
bee vectoring (using commercial honey bees or bumble bees) during the
bloom period of certain growing plants for the purposes of disease
control and prevention.  Formulated end-use products with this active
ingredient are applied at very low use rates which would not be expected
to increase levels of the microbe above natural levels (MRID No.
499492-10).  Additionally, the fungus would not tolerate the conditions
water is subjected to in a drinking water facility (including:
chlorination, pH adjustments, high temperatures and/or anaerobic
conditions).

The results of toxicity testing indicate there is no risk to human
health or the environment from Clonostachys rosea strain CR-7. There are
no reports of ecological or human health hazards caused by this
microorganism. It does not produce recognized toxins, enzymes, or
virulence factors normally associated with mammalian invasiveness or
toxicity.  The absence of acute toxicity or pathogenicity in laboratory
animals demonstrates the benign nature of this strain.]

2. Non-dietary exposure. [The intended use of Clonostachys rosea strain
CR-7 is application via bee vectoring (using commercial honey bees or
bumble bees) during the bloom period of certain growing plants for the
purposes of disease control and prevention.  Formulated end-use products
with this active ingredient are applied at very low use rates which
would not be expected to increase levels of the microbe above natural
levels (MRID No. 499492-10).  The results of toxicity testing indicate
there is no risk to human health or the environment from Clonostachys
rosea strain CR-7. There are no reports of ecological or human health
hazards caused by this microorganism. It does not produce recognized
toxins, enzymes, or virulence factors normally associated with mammalian
invasiveness or toxicity.  The absence of acute toxicity or
pathogenicity in laboratory animals demonstrates the benign nature of
this strain.  Non-dietary exposures would not be expected to pose any
quantifiable risk due to a lack of residues of toxicological concern.]

E. Cumulative Effects

[It is not expected that, when used as proposed, Clonostachys rosea
strain CR-7 would result in residues that are of toxicological concern.
The intended use of Clonostachys rosea strain CR-7 is application via
bee vectoring (using commercial honey bees or bumble bees) during the
bloom period of certain growing plants for the purposes of disease
control and prevention.  Formulated end-use products with this active
ingredient are applied at very low use rates which would not be expected
to increase levels of the microbe above natural levels (MRID No.
499492-10).  The results of toxicity testing indicate there is no risk
to human health or the environment from Clonostachys rosea strain CR-7.
There are no reports of ecological or human health hazards caused by
this microorganism. It does not produce recognized toxins, enzymes, or
virulence factors normally associated with mammalian invasiveness or
toxicity.  The absence of acute toxicity or pathogenicity in laboratory
animals demonstrates the benign nature of this strain.]

F. Safety Determination

	1. U.S. population. [Acute toxicity studies have shown that
Clonostachys rosea strain CR-7 is not toxic, pathogenic, infective or
irritating to mammals.  The intended use of Clonostachys rosea strain
CR-7 is application via bee vectoring (using commercial honey bees or
bumble bees) during the bloom period of certain growing plants for the
purposes of disease control and prevention.  Formulated end-use products
with this active ingredient are applied at very low use rates which
would not be expected to increase levels of the microbe above natural
levels (MRID No. 499492-10).  The results of toxicity testing indicate
there is no risk to human health or the environment from Clonostachys
rosea strain CR-7. There are no reports of ecological or human health
hazards caused by this microorganism. It does not produce recognized
toxins, enzymes, or virulence factors normally associated with mammalian
invasiveness or toxicity.  The absence of acute toxicity or
pathogenicity in laboratory animals demonstrates the benign nature of
this strain.  There is a reasonable certainty of no harm to the general
US population from exposure to this active ingredient.]

	2. Infants and children. [As mentioned above, it is not expected that,
when used as proposed, Clonostachys rosea strain CR-7 would result in
residues that are of toxicological concern. There is a reasonable
certainty of no harm for infants and children from exposure to
Clonostachys rosea strain CR-7 from the proposed uses.]

G. Effects on the Immune and Endocrine Systems

	[To date there is no evidence to suggest that Clonostachys rosea strain
CR-7 functions in a manner similar to any known hormone, or that it acts
as an endocrine disrupter.]

H. Existing Tolerances

	[There is no US EPA tolerance or tolerance exemption for Clonostachys
rosea strain CR-7.]

I. International Tolerances

[A Codex Alimentarium Commission Maximum Residue Level (MRL) is not
established for Clonostachys rosea strain CR-7.]

 PAGE

 PAGE   7


[Federal Register: February 28, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 40)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 10645-10646]
[DOCID:fr28fe08-2]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2007-0203; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-105-AD;
Amendment 39-15384; AD 2008-04-12]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 767-200, -300, -300F, and
-400ER Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is superseding an existing airworthiness directive
(AD), which applies to certain Boeing Model 767-200, -300, and -300F
series airplanes. That AD currently requires reworking the surface of
the ground stud bracket of the left and right transformer rectifier
units (TRUs) and the airplane structure mounting surface, and measuring
the resistance from the bracket to the structure and the ground lugs to
the bracket using a bonding meter. This new AD revises the
applicability of the existing AD to include additional airplanes and
requires, among other actions, installation of a new ground stud
bracket using faying surface bonding. This AD results from a report of
loss of all direct current (DC) power generation during a flight, due
to inadequate electrical ground path between the ground bracket of the
TRUs/main battery charger (MBC) and the structure. We are issuing this
AD to prevent depletion of the main battery while in flight, resulting
from the loss of both TRUs and the MBC, and consequent loss of all DC
power, which could impact the safe flight and landing of the airplane
due to the loss of function or malfunction of essential/critical
systems and displays in the cockpit.

DATES: This AD becomes effective April 3, 2008.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in the AD as of April 3,
2008.
    On December 1, 2004 (69 FR 67043, November 16, 2004), the Director
of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-24A0119, Revision 2, dated August 19,
2004, as revised by Boeing Information Notice 767-24A0119 IN 01, dated
October 21, 2004.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124-
2207.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The address for the
Docket Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is the Document Management
Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30,
West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Louis Natsiopoulous, Aerospace
Engineer, Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-
3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 to include an AD that supersedes AD 2004-23-14, amendment
39-13869 (69 FR 67043, November 16, 2004). The existing AD applies to
certain Boeing Model 767-200, -300, and -300F series airplanes. That
NPRM was published in the Federal Register on November 19, 2007 (72 FR
64964). That NPRM proposed to require reworking the surface of the
ground stud bracket of the left and right transformer rectifier units
(TRUs) and the airplane structure mounting surface, and measuring the
resistance from the bracket to the structure and the ground lugs to the
bracket using a bonding meter. That NPRM also proposed revising the
applicability of the existing AD to include additional airplanes and to
require, among other actions, installation of a new ground stud bracket
using faying surface bonding.

Comments

    We provided the public the opportunity to participate in the
development of this AD. We considered the comment that has been
received on the NPRM. Boeing, the single commenter, supports the NPRM.

Conclusion

    We have carefully reviewed the available data, including the
comment that has been received, and determined that air safety and the
public interest require adopting the AD as proposed.

Costs of Compliance

    There are 932 airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide
fleet. The following table provides the estimated costs for U.S.
operators to comply with this AD.

                                                                     Estimated Costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of U.S.-
              Action                   Work hours      Average labor       Parts            Cost per airplane         registered         Fleet cost
                                                       rate per hour                                                   airplanes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rework and Measurement (required   1................             $80              $4  $84.........................             262  $22,008.
 by AD 2004-23-14).
New actions......................  1 or 2 \1\.......              80             208  $288 or $368 \1\............             412  $118,656 or
                                                                                $151,616.\1\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Depending on the airplane configuration.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. 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.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for

safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to
exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We have determined that this AD will not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a
substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866;
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    (3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the ADDRESSES
section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends Sec.  39.13 by
removing amendment 39-13869 (69 FR 67043, November 16, 2004) and by
adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD):

2008-04-12 Boeing: Amendment 39-15384. Docket No. FAA-2007-0203;
Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-105-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This AD becomes effective April 3, 2008.

Affected ADs

    (b) This AD supersedes AD 2004-23-14.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 767-200, -300, -300F, and -
400ER series airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified
in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-24A0162, dated May 30, 2006.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from a report of loss of all direct current
(DC) power generation during a flight, due to inadequate electrical
ground path between the ground bracket of the left and right
transformer rectifier unit (TRUs)/main battery charger (MBC) and the
structure. We are issuing this AD to prevent depletion of the main
battery while in flight, resulting from the loss of both TRUs and
the MBC, and consequent loss of all DC power, which could impact the
safe flight and landing of the airplane due to the loss of function
or malfunction of essential/critical systems and displays in the
cockpit.

Compliance

    (e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.

Requirements of AD 2004-23-14

Rework and Measure Resistance

    (f) For Model 767-200, -300, and -300F series airplanes, as
listed in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-24A0119, Revision 2,
dated August 19, 2004; on which the actions of Boeing Service
Bulletin 767-24-0119, dated May 14, 1998, and/or Revision 1, dated
December 16, 1999, have been done: Within 45 days after December 1,
2004 (the effective date of AD 2004-23-14), rework the ground stud
bracket of the TRUs and structure mounting surface, and measure the
resistance from the bracket to the structure and the grounding lug
to the bracket using a bonding meter, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-
24A0119, Revision 2, dated August 19, 2004, as revised by Boeing
Information Notice 767-24A0119 IN 01, dated October 21, 2004, except
as provided by paragraph (g) of this AD.
    (g) Step 4, Sheet 3 of Figure 1 in the Accomplishment
Instructions of the service bulletin only specifies to install one
collar with part number (P/N) BACC30M6. However, a collar with P/N
BACC30BL6 (as listed in paragraph 2.C., ``Parts Necessary For Each
Airplane'' of the service bulletin) may be used as an alternative
method of compliance (AMOC).

New Actions Required by This AD

Rework, Installation, Measurement, as Applicable

    (h) For all airplanes: Within 36 months after the effective date
of this AD, rework the existing ground stud bracket of the TRUs/MBC,
measure the resistance, and install a new ground stud bracket of the
TRUs by doing all the applicable actions specified in the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-
24A0162, dated May 30, 2006.

AMOCs

    (i)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in
accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA
Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local
FSDO.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (j) You must use Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-24A0119,
Revision 2, dated August 19, 2004, as revised by Boeing Information
Notice 767-24A0119 IN 01, dated October 21, 2004; and Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 767-24A0162, dated May 30, 2006, to perform the
actions that are required by this AD, unless the AD specifies
otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-
24A0162, dated May 30, 2006, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and
1 CFR part 51.
    (2) On December 1, 2004 (69 FR 67043, November 16, 2004), the
Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-24A0119, Revision 2,
dated August 19, 2004, as revised by Boeing Information Notice 767-
24A0119 IN 01, dated October 21, 2004.
    (3) Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle,
Washington 98124-2207, for a copy of this service information. You
may review copies at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601
Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the National Archives
and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of this material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to:
http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 13, 2008.
Stephen P. Boyd,
Assistant Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E8-3394 Filed 2-27-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 174 (Friday, September 9, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55426-55427]
[FR Doc No: 2022-19534]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2022-0049; FRL-10199-01-OMS]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; NSPS for Pressure Sensitive Tape and Label
Surface Coating Operations

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), NSPS for Pressure Sensitive Tape
and Label Surface Coating Operations to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act. This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is
currently approved through November 30, 2022. Public comments were
previously requested, via the Federal Register, on April 8, 2022,
during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30
days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given
below, including its estimated burden and cost to the public. An agency
may neither conduct nor sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before October 11,
2022.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OAR-2022-0049, online using https://www.regulations.gov/ (our preferred
method), or by email to [email protected], or by mail to: EPA Docket
Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460.
    The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in
the public docket without change, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
    Submit written comments and recommendations to OMB for the proposed
information collection within 30 days of publication of this notice to
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular information
collection by selecting ``Currently under 30-day Review--Open for
Public Comments'' or by using the search function.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Muntasir Ali, Sector Policies and
Program Division (D243-05), Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina, 27711; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents, which explain in
detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available
in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
https://www.regulations.gov, or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC
West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC.
The telephone number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For
additional information about EPA's public docket, visit: http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: The New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for Pressure
Sensitive Tape and Label Surface Coating Operations (40 CFR part 60
subpart RR) were proposed on December 30, 1980, and promulgated on
October 18, 1983, and amended on October 17, 2000. These regulations
apply to existing facilities and new facilities with coating lines used
in the manufacture of pressure sensitive tape and label materials.
Existing facilities and new facilities are both subject to these
regulations, except those facilities that input 45 mega grams (Mgs) of
volatile organic compounds (VOC) or less per 12-month period. New
facilities include those that commenced construction, modification or
reconstruction after the date of proposal. This information is being
collected to assure compliance with 40 CFR part 60, subpart RR.

    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: Pressure sensitive tape and label
surface coating operations.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 60,
subpart RR).
    Estimated number of respondents: 48 (total).
    Frequency of response: Semiannual.
    Total estimated burden: 4,530 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: $636,000 (per year), which includes $93,400
in annualized capital/srartup and/or operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is an increase in burden from the
most-recently approved ICR. This increase is not due to any program
changes. The change in burden and cost estimates is due to an increase
in the number of sources, based on an assumption of continued industry
growth.

Courtney Kerwin,
Director, Regulatory Support Division.
[FR Doc. 2022-19534 Filed 9-8-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: December 12, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 238)]
[Notices]
[Page 70640-70642]
[DOCID:fr12de07-93]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-56907; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2007-122]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
of Proposed Rule Change Relating to Certain Modifications to the
Initial Listing Standards for Index-Linked Securities

December 5, 2007.
    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 November 28, 2007, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'' or ``Exchange''),
through its wholly owned subsidiary, NYSE Arca Equities, Inc. (``NYSE
Arca Equities''), 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 substantially 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

    The Exchange proposes to amend NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(6),
the Exchange's listing standards for Equity Index-Linked Securities,
Commodity-Linked Securities, and Currency-Linked Securities
(collectively, ``Index-Linked Securities'').\3\ The text of the
proposed rule change is available at the Exchange, the Commission's
Public Reference Room, and http://www.nyse.com.

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

    \3\ NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(6) defines Equity Index-
Linked Securities to be securities that provide for the payment at
maturity of a cash amount based on the performance of an underlying
index or indexes of equity securities (an ``Equity Reference
Asset''). Commodity-Linked Securities are securities that provide
for the payment at maturity of a cash amount based on the
performance of one or more physical commodities or commodity
futures, options or other commodity derivatives or Commodity-Based
Trust Shares (as defined in NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.201), or a
basket or index of any of the foregoing (a ``Commodity Reference
Asset''). Currency-Linked Securities are securities that provide for
the payment at maturity of a cash amount based on the performance of
one or more currencies, or options or currency futures or other
currency derivatives or Currency Trust Shares (as defined in NYSE
Arca Equities Rule 8.202), or a basket or index of any of the
foregoing (a ``Currency Reference Asset,'' and together with Equity
Reference Asset and Commodity Reference Asset, collectively, a
``Reference Asset'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 one of the requirements of NYSE Arca
Equities Rule 5.2(j)(6)(A), which sets

forth the listing requirements applicable to all types of Index-Linked
Securities to be listed and traded on the Exchange, to provide for
greater flexibility in the listing criteria for such securities.
Currently, NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(6)(A)(d) provides that the
payment at maturity of a cash amount for Index-Linked Securities may or
may not provide for a multiple of the positive performance of an
underlying Reference Asset, and in no event will payment at maturity be
based on a multiple of the negative performance of an underlying
Reference Asset.
    The Exchange proposes to amend NYSE Arca Equities Rule
5.2(j)(6)(A)(d) to: (a) Allow the Exchange to consider for listing and
trading Index-Linked Securities that provide for payment at maturity
based on a multiple of the direct or inverse performance of an
underlying Reference Asset; and (b) provide that in no event will a
loss or negative payment at maturity be accelerated by a multiple that
exceeds twice the performance of an underlying Reference Asset. The
Exchange proposes these changes in order to permit the listing and
trading of Index-Linked Securities that employ investment strategies
similar or analogous to certain exchange-traded funds like the Short
Funds and UltraShort Funds of the ProShares Trust and the Inverse Funds
and Leveraged Inverse Funds of the Rydex ETF Trust, each of which trade
on the Exchange pursuant to unlisted trading privileges (``UTP'') under
NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(3).\4\ The Short Funds and Inverse Funds
seek daily investment results, before fees and expenses, that
correspond to the inverse or opposite of the daily performance (-100%)
of the respective underlying indexes, and the Ultra Short Funds and
Leveraged Inverse Funds seek daily investment results, before fees and
expenses, that correspond to twice the inverse or opposite of the daily
performance (-200%) of the respective underlying indexes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 56763 (November 7,
2007), 72 FR 64103 (November 14, 2007) (SR-NYSEArca-2007-81)
(approving the trading of shares of funds of the Rydex ETF Trust
pursuant to UTP); 56601 (October 2, 2007), 72 FR 57625 (October 10,
2007) (SR-NYSEArca-2007-79) (approving the trading shares of eight
funds of the ProShares Trust based on international equity indexes
pursuant to UTP); 55125 (January 18, 2007), 72 FR 3462 (January 25,
2007) (SR-NYSEArca-2006-87) (approving the trading of shares of 81
funds of the ProShares Trust pursuant to UTP); and 54026 (June 21,
2006), 71 FR 36850 (June 28, 2006) (SR-PCX-2005-115) (approving the
trading of shares of certain other funds of the ProShares Trust
pursuant to UTP).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that these changes will allow greater
flexibility in the listing and trading of Index-Linked Securities and
offer investors additional investment options. The Exchange believes
that investors will continue to be protected because the payment at
maturity cannot be based on a multiple that exceeds twice the inverse
performance of an underlying Reference Asset.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\6\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\7\ in particular, in that it
is 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 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change will impose no
burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

    The Exchange states that no written comments were solicited or
received with respect to the proposed rule change.

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

    Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which NYSE Arca consents, the Commission will:
    A. By order approve such proposed rule change, or
    B. institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml.
); or     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-NYSEArca-2007-122 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2007-122. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail 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 Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,

all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection
and copying 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. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2007-122 and should
be submitted on or before January 2, 2008.

For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant
to delegated authority.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-23971 Filed 12-11-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 214 (Tuesday, November 5, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 66266-66267]
[FR Doc No: 2013-26523]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[USCG-2013-0880]

Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Hackensack River, Jersey City,
NJ

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation from regulations.

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

SUMMARY: The Commander, First Coast Guard District, has issued a
temporary deviation from the regulations governing the operation of the
Path (Railroad) Bridge across the Hackensack River, mile 3.0, at Jersey
City, New Jersey. Under this temporary deviation, the bridge may remain
in the closed position for 26 consecutive weekends to facilitate bridge
repairs.

DATES: This deviation is effective on weekends from 12:01 a.m. Saturday
November 23, 2013 through 12:01 Monday May 19, 2014.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this deviation, [USCG-2013-0880] is available
at http://www.regulations.gov.

Type the docket number in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.''
Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this deviation.
You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140, on
the ground floor of the Department of Transportation West Building,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary deviation, call or email Joe Arca, Project Officer, First
Coast Guard District<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or<PHONE_NUMBER>. If you
have questions on viewing the docket, call Barbara Hairston, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Path railroad bridge has a vertical
clearance of 40 feet at mean high water, and 45 feet at mean low water
in the closed position. The existing drawbridge operating regulations
are found at 33 CFR 117.5.
    The bridge owner, Port Authority Trans-Hudson Corporation (PATH),
requested a bridge closure for 26 consecutive weekends to facilitate
replacement of rails and ties at the lift span.
    Under this temporary deviation, the Path Railroad Bridge may remain
in the closed position for 26 consecutive weekends from 12:01 a.m.
Saturdays to 12:01 a.m. Mondays effective November 23, 2013 through May
19, 2014.
    Vessels that can pass under the closed draw may do so at all times.
    The Hackensack River in the vicinity of the Path Railroad Bridge is
transited primarily by commercial vessels. Most vessels that habitually
transit under the bridge do not require bridge openings.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the bridge must return to its
regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the designated
repair period. This deviation from the operating regulations is
authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: October 11, 2013.
Gary Kassof,
Bridge Program Manager, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2013-26523 Filed 11-4-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P