[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 190 (Friday, September 30, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67397-67398]
[FR Doc No: 2016-23667]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2010-0008]

Construction Fall Protection Systems Criteria and Practices, and
Training Requirements; Extension of the Office of Management and
Budget's (OMB) Approval of Information Collection (Paperwork)
Requirements

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Request for public comments.

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

SUMMARY: OSHA solicits public comments concerning its proposal to
extend OMB approval of the information collection requirements
contained in the Construction Standards on Fall Protection Systems
Criteria and Practices (29 CFR 1926.502), and Training Requirements (29
CFR 1926.503).

DATES: Comments must be submitted (postmarked, sent, or received) by
November 29, 2016.

ADDRESSES:
    Electronically: You may submit comments and attachments
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal. Follow the instructions online for submitting
comments.
    Facsimile: If your comments, including attachments, are not longer
than 10 pages you may fax them to the OSHA Docket Office at (202) 693-
1648.
    Mail, hand delivery, express mail, messenger, or courier service:
When using this method, you must submit a copy of your comments and
attachments to the OSHA Docket Office, Docket No. OSHA-2010-0008, U.S.
Department of Labor, Room N-2625, 200 Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20210. Deliveries (hand, express mail, messenger, and
courier service) are accepted during the Department of Labor's and
Docket Office's normal business hours, 8:15 a.m. to 4:45 p.m., e.t.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency name and the
OSHA docket number (Docket No. OSHA-2010-0008) for this Information
Collection Request (ICR). All comments, including any personal
information you provide, are placed in the public docket without
change, and may be made available online at http://www.regulations.gov.
For further information on submitting comments, see the ``Public
Participation'' heading in the section of this notice titled
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
    Docket: To read or download comments or other material in the
docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov or the OSHA Docket Office at
the address above. All documents in the docket (including this Federal
Register notice) are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index;
however, some information (e.g., copyrighted material) is not publicly
available to read or download from the Web site. All submissions,
including copyrighted material, are available for inspection and
copying at the OSHA Docket Office. You may also contact Theda Kenney,
Directorate of Standards and Guidance, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor,
Room N-3609, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210; (202)
693-2044, to obtain a copy of the ICR.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Office of Construction Services,
Directorate of Construction, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N-
3476, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone
(202) 693-2020.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Department of Labor, as part of its continuing effort to reduce
paperwork and respondent (i.e., employer) burden, conducts a
preclearance consultation program to provide the public with an
opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing information
collection requirements in accord with the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This program ensures that
information is in the desired format, reporting burden (time and costs)
is minimal, collection instruments are understandable, and OSHA's
estimate of the information collection burden is correct. The
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (the OSH Act) authorizes
information collection by employers as necessary or appropriate for
enforcement of the OSH Act, or for developing information regarding the
causes and prevention of occupational injuries, illnesses, and
accidents (29 U.S.C. 657).
    The Standards on Construction Fall Protection Systems Criteria and
Practices (29 CFR 1926.502) and Training Requirements (29 CFR 1926.503)
ensure that employers provide the required fall protection for their
workers. Accordingly, these standards have the following paperwork
requirements: Paragraphs (c)(4)(ii) and (k) of 29 CFR 1926.502, which
specify certification of safety nets and development of fall protection
plans, respectively, and paragraph (b) of 29 CFR 1926.503, which
requires employers to certify training records. The training
certification requirement specified in paragraph (b) of 29 CFR 1926.503
documents the training provided to workers potentially exposed to fall
hazards in construction. A competent person must train these workers to
recognize fall hazards and in the use of procedures and equipment that
minimize these hazards. An employer must verify compliance with this
training requirement by preparing and maintaining a written
certification record that contains the name or other identifier of the
worker receiving the training, the date(s) of the training, and the
signature of the competent person who conducted the training, or of the
employer.

II. Special Issues for Comment

    OSHA has a particular interest in comments on the following issues:
     Whether the proposed information collection requirements
are necessary for the proper performance of the Agency's functions,
including whether the information is useful;
     The accuracy of OSHA's estimate of the burden (time and
costs) of the information collection requirements, including the
validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
     The quality, utility, and clarity of the information
collected; and
     Ways to minimize the burden on employers who must comply;
for example, by using automated or other technological information
collection and transmission techniques.

III. Proposed Actions

    OSHA is requesting that OMB extend its approval of the collection
of information requirements contained in the Construction Standards on
Fall Protection Systems Criteria and Practices (29 CFR 1926.502) and
Training Requirements (29 CFR 1926.503). OSHA is requesting a 31,264
burden hour reduction, from 457,108 hours to 425,844 based on the
Agency's determinations that fewer employers are required to comply
with the Standard's collection of information requirements and that
information exchanged during an OSHA compliance inspection is not
covered by the PRA. The Agency will summarize the comments submitted in
response to this notice and will include this summary in the request to
OMB.
    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.
    Title: Construction Fall Protection Systems Criteria and Practices
(29 CFR 1926.502) and Training Requirements (29 CFR 1926.503).
    OMB Control Number: 1218-0197.
    Affected Public: Business or other for-profits; Federal Government;
State, Local, or Tribal Government.
    Number of Responses: 5,314,317.
    Frequency of Record Keeping: On occasion, annually.
    Average Time per Response: Time per response ranges from 5 minutes
(.08 hour) to certify a safety net to 1 hour to develop a fall
protection plan.
    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 425,844.
    Estimated Cost (Operation and Maintenance): $0.

IV. Public Participation--Submission of Comments on This Notice and
Internet Access to Comments and Submissions

    You may submit comments in response to this document as follows:
(1) electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal; (2) by facsimile (fax); or (3) by hard copy. All
comments, attachments, and other material must identify the Agency name
and the OSHA docket number for this ICR (Docket No. OSHA-2010-0008).
You may supplement electronic submissions by uploading document files
electronically. If you wish to mail additional materials in reference
to an electronic or facsimile submission, you must submit them to the
OSHA Docket Office (see the section of this notice titled ADDRESSES).
The additional materials must clearly identify your electronic comments
by your full name, date, and the docket number so the Agency can attach
them to your comments.
    Because of security procedures, the use of regular mail may cause a
significant delay in the receipt of comments. For information about
security procedures concerning the delivery of materials by hand,
express delivery, messenger, or courier service, please contact the
OSHA Docket Office at<PHONE_NUMBER>, (TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>).
    Comments and submissions are posted without change at http://www.regulations.gov. Therefore, OSHA cautions commenters about
submitting personal information such as social security numbers and
date of birth. Although all submissions are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index, some information (e.g., copyrighted
material) is not publicly available to read or download from this Web
site. All submissions, including copyrighted material, are available
for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office. Information on
using the http://www.regulations.gov Web site to submit comments and
access the docket is available at the Web site's ``User Tips'' link.
Contact the OSHA Docket Office for information about materials not
available from the Web site, and for assistance in using the Internet
to locate docket submissions.

V. Authority and Signature

    David Michaels, Ph.D., MPH, Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, directed the preparation of this
notice. The authority for this notice is the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506 et seq.) and Secretary of Labor's Order No. 1-2012
(77 FR 3912).

    Signed at Washington, DC, on September 27, 2016.
David Michaels,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2016-23667 Filed 9-29-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 22 (Wednesday, February 2, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 5687-5691]
[FR Doc No: 2011-2265]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0676; FRL-8860-4]

Isobutane; Exemption From the Requirement of a Tolerance

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance for residues of isobutane (CAS Reg. No. 75-28-5) when
used as an inert ingredient (propellant) in pesticide formulations
applied to growing crops and raw agricultural commodities after
harvest, and when used as an inert ingredient (propellant) in pesticide
formulations applied to animals (used for food). Landis International,
on behalf of Whitmire Micro-Gen, submitted a petition to EPA under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), requesting establishment
of an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. This regulation
eliminates the need to establish a maximum permissible level for
residues of isobutane.

DATES: This regulation is effective February 2, 2011. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before April 4, 2011 and
must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR
part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0676. All documents in the
docket are listed in the docket index available at http://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain
other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the
Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are available in the electronic
docket at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard
copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac
Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The Docket
Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility telephone number is (703)
305-5805.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elizabeth Fertich, Registration
Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
    This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular
entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.

B. How can I get electronic access to other related information?

    You may access a frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR
part 180 through the Government Printing Office's e-CFR site at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr. To access the harmonized test guidelines
referenced in this document electronically, please go to http://www.epa.gov/ocspp and select ``Test Methods and Guidelines.''

C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0676 in the subject line on the first
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must
be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before
April 4, 2011. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections and
hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing that does not contain any CBI for inclusion in the public
docket. Information not marked confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2
may be disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice. Submit a copy of
your non-CBI objection or hearing request, identified by docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0676, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket Facility's normal hours of operation (8:30
a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays).
Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. The Docket Facility telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

II. Petition for Exemption

    In the Federal Register of October 7, 2009 (74 FR 51597) (FRL-8792-
7), EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408 of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C.
346a, announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP 9E7586) by
Whitmire Micro-Gen, c/o Landis International, P.O. Box 5126, Valdosta,
GA 31603-5126. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.910 and 40 CFR
180.930 be amended by establishing an exemption from the requirement of
a tolerance for residues of isobutane (CAS Reg. No. 75-28-5) when used
as an inert ingredient (propellant) in pesticide formulations applied
pre- and post-harvest and pesticide formulations applied to animals.
That notice referenced a summary of the petition prepared by

Landis International, on behalf of Whitmire Micro-Gen, the petitioner,
which is available in the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. There
were no comments received in response to the notice of filing.

III. Inert Ingredient Definition

    Inert ingredients are all ingredients that are not active
ingredients as defined in 40 CFR 153.125 and include, but are not
limited to, the following types of ingredients (except when they have a
pesticidal efficacy of their own): Solvents such as alcohols and
hydrocarbons; surfactants such as polyoxyethylene polymers and fatty
acids; carriers such as clay and diatomaceous earth; thickeners such as
carrageenan and modified cellulose; wetting, spreading, and dispersing
agents; propellants in aerosol dispensers; microencapsulating agents;
and emulsifiers. The term ``inert'' is not intended to imply
nontoxicity; the ingredient may or may not be chemically active.
Generally, EPA has exempted inert ingredients from the requirement of a
tolerance based on the low toxicity of the individual inert
ingredients.

IV. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish an
exemption from the requirement for a tolerance (the legal limit for a
pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA determines that
the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines
``safe'' to mean that ``there is a reasonable certainty that no harm
will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue,
including all anticipated dietary exposures and all other exposures for
which there is reliable information.'' This includes exposure through
drinking water and in residential settings, but does not include
occupational exposure. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to
give special consideration to exposure of infants and children to the
pesticide chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure
that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to
infants and children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical
residue.* * *''
    EPA establishes exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance only
in those cases where it can be clearly demonstrated that the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide chemical residues under reasonably
foreseeable circumstances will pose no appreciable risks to human
health. In order to determine the risks from aggregate exposure to
pesticide inert ingredients, the Agency considers the toxicity of the
inert in conjunction with possible exposure to residues of the inert
ingredient through food, drinking water, and through other exposures
that occur as a result of pesticide use in residential settings. If EPA
is able to determine that a finite tolerance is not necessary to ensure
that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from
aggregate exposure to the inert ingredient, an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance may be established.
    Consistent with section 408(c)(2)(A) of FFDCA, and the factors
specified in FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(B), EPA has reviewed the available
scientific data and other relevant information in support of this
action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a
determination on aggregate exposure for isobutane including exposure
resulting from the exemption established by this action. EPA's
assessment of exposures and risks associated with isobutane follows.

A. Toxicological Profile

    EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered their
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children.
    Isobutane is an asphyxiant and acute exposure may cause tachypnea
and tachycardia. While direct contact with the liquid may cause burns,
the vapor has no effects on the skin and eyes. Sudden death has also
been reported from abusive ``sniffing'' of products containing
isobutane, especially lighter refills. In a safety assessment of
isobutane as a cosmetic ingredient (1982), dermal irritation in humans
was very slight and transient erythema occurred randomly. Repeated
inhalation exposure did not result in any changes in
electroencephalograms, adrenocortical function, pulmonary function,
neurological response, subjective response, cardiac function or
cognitive response.
    Acute toxicity data on isobutane were limited to inhalation
exposure and eye and skin irritation. Isobutane was not acutely toxic
via the inhalation route and was basically non-irritating to the skin
and eyes of rabbits.
    Several studies were found in which monkeys, rabbits, and rats were
exposed to formulations or to mixtures containing isobutane. No
toxicity was reported for two species of monkeys and one species of
rabbit exposed for 90 days to various formulations containing
isobutane.
    No effects on survival, body weight, hematology, clinical
pathology, or liver and kidney weights were observed in rats exposed to
0, 1,000, or 4,500 ppm (equivalent to 0, 622 or 2,803 milligrams/
kilogram/day (mg/kg/day) of a 50:50 mixture of isobutane: isopentane
for 13 weeks, however clinical signs included hunched posture, lethargy
and crusted eyes in both exposure groups. There were no clinical signs
of toxicity observed and no gross or microscopic lesions seen in
Sprague-Dawley rats exposed to 0, 44, 432, or 4,437 ppm (equivalent to
0, 27, 269, or 2,763 mg/kg/day) of a mixture containing 25% each of n-
butane, isobutane, n-pentane, and isopentane for 3 weeks.
    In a 4-week sub-chronic toxicity study combined with reproduction/
developmental toxicity screening and neurotoxicity screening study,
Sprague Dawley CD rats were treated with isobutane (purity 99.0%) to
assess the repeated dose, reproductive and developmental toxicity
potential of this material when administered by whole body inhalation
exposure. A no-observed-adverse effect level (NOAEL) of 9,000 ppm
(equivalent to 5,600 mg/kg/day) was concluded for general systemic/
neurotoxic (parental) endpoints in this study. Based on decreased male
and female fertility and increased post-implantation loss in the 9,000
ppm group, the fertility and reproductive endpoints NOAEL was
determined to be 3,000 ppm (equivalent to 1,867 mg/kg/day). There were
no effects on offspring survival, body weight and development up to
post-natal day 4. A NOAEL of 9,000 ppm (equivalent to 5,600 mg/kg/day)
was concluded for developmental effects. No effects on functional
observational battery parameters and motor activity were observed in
this study.
    In terms of neurotoxicity, acute toxicity studies show effects on
the central nervous system (CNS) with rodents more sensitive than dogs.
Exposure to a concentration of 55% was lethal in dogs, while 41-52% was
lethal to mice within 2-3 minutes. The 10-minute EC50 for
CNS effects was listed as 200,000 ppm (equivalent to 124,560 mg/kg/day)
for the rat.
    Several tests were found measuring the cardiopulmonary toxicity of
isobutane. No effects were seen in anesthetized Rhesus monkeys exposed
for 5 minutes to 5% isobutane through a tracheal cannula. Effects on
the heart were shown in the dog with concentration-related decreased

contractility, pressure, and output measured between 2-10% isobutane.
Mongrel dogs were also anesthetized and exposed to isobutane through a
tracheal cannula. Blood pressure and heart rate were not affected by
exposure. All concentrations significantly increased pulmonary
resistance and decreased pulmonary compliance. Similarly, anesthetized
male Osburn-Mendel rats exposed to 27% isobutane showed apnea after 8.7
minutes of exposure followed by cardiac arrest; decreased respiratory
rate, tidal volume, and pulmonary compliance and increased airway
resistance were also found. In another test with anesthetized male
Swiss mice, 20-40% isobutane did not induce cardiac arrhythmia, but did
sensitize the heart to epinephrine-induced arrhythmia.
    No evidence of an increase in mutation frequency was found in five
strains of Salmonella typhimurium exposed to up to 50% isobutane in
air. Strains TA98, TA100, TA1535, TA1537, and TA1538 were exposed for 6
hours with and without metabolic activation. No chronic toxicity or
carcinogenicity studies with isobutane were identified. However, the
concern for carcinogenicity is low based on rapid metabolism, lack of
mutagenicity and lack of systemic toxicity at doses up to 1,867 mg/kg/
day. In addition, the Agency used a qualitative structure activity
relationship (SAR) database, DEREK11, to determine if there were
structural alerts suggestive of carcinogenicity. No structural alerts
were identified.
    Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by, as well as the no-observed-adverse-effect-
level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from
the toxicity studies can be found at http://www.regulations.gov in the
document ``PC Code 800015: Isobutane (CAS Reg. No. 75-28-5); Human
Health Risk Assessment and Ecological Effects Assessment to the Support
Proposed Exemption from the Requirement of a Tolerance When Used as an
Inert Ingredient in Pesticide Formulations'' at [6] in docket ID number
EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0676.

B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern

    Due to the low potential hazard of isobutane, quantitative dietary,
occupational and residential exposure assessments are not necessary. In
a 4-week sub-chronic toxicity study combined with reproduction/
developmental toxicity screening and neurotoxicity screening study,
exposure of male and female rats to target concentrations of 900, 3,000
or 9,000 ppm (equivalent to 560, 1,867, and 5,600 mg/kg/day) of
isobutane by whole-body inhalation for four weeks resulted in no
general systemic/neurotoxic effects. Based on decreased male and female
fertility and increased post-implantation loss in the 5,600 mg/kg/day
group, the fertility and reproductive endpoints NOAEL was determined to
be 1,867 mg/kg/day. There were no effects on offspring survival, body
weight and development up to post-natal day 4. A NOAEL of 5,600 mg/kg/
day was concluded for developmental effects. Since no toxicity was
observed at high doses, quantitative risk assessment is deemed
unnecessary.

C. Exposure Assessment

    No hazard was identified for the acute and chronic dietary
assessment (food and drinking water), or for the short-, intermediate-,
and long-term residential assessments, and therefore no aggregate risk
assessments were performed. Available toxicological studies indicate
lack of systemic toxicity at doses up to 1,867 mg/kg/day. Therefore, no
quantitative dietary or occupational and residential risk assessment
was conducted.
    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses and drinking water. In
evaluating dietary exposure to isobutane, EPA considered exposure under
the proposed exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. Since
toxicity effects were seen only at high doses for isobutane, a
quantitative exposure assessment for isobutane was not conducted. Any
possible dietary exposure to isobutane from its use as an inert
ingredient in pesticide products would be through consumption of food
to which pesticide products containing it have been applied and
possibly through drinking water (from runoff). Isobutane is expected to
exist in the atmosphere as a gas and volatilize rapidly from surface
water and soil. This will reduce the amount of isobutane that is
available for uptake by plants. Run-off into surface water is not
anticipated due to rapid volatization, and therefore, contributions of
concern to drinking water are not expected.
    2. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is
used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary
exposure (e.g., textiles (clothing and diapers), carpets, swimming
pools, and hard surface disinfection on walls, floors, tables).
    Isobutane is widely used as a propellant in a variety of household
products, such as cleaners and air fresheners. It is also used in
nonfood use insecticide products and personal care products.
Considering the low toxicity of isobutane, residues of concern are not
anticipated from residential exposures (inhalation and dermal) and
therefore a quantitative aggregate risk assessment was not performed.
    3. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
    EPA has not found isobutane to share a common mechanism of toxicity
with any other substances, and does not appear to produce a toxic
metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that isobutane does not
have a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances. For
information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which chemicals have a
common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the cumulative effects of
such chemicals, see EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.

D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

    Section 408 of the FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply an
additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants and children in
the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal and postnatal
toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity and exposure
unless EPA determines that a different margin of safety will be safe
for infants and children. This additional margin of safety is commonly
referred to as the FQPA safety factor (SF). In applying this provision,
EPA either retains the default value of 10X or uses a different
additional safety factor when reliable data available to EPA supports
the choice of a different factor.
    The toxicity database is sufficient for isobutane and potential
exposure is adequately characterized given the low toxicity of the
chemical. In terms of hazard, there are low concerns and no residual
uncertainties regarding prenatal and/or postnatal toxicity. In the OECD
422 study via the inhalation route, the NOAEL for general systemic
toxicity and neurotoxicity was 5,600 mg/kg/day (the highest dose
tested). Based on decreased male and female fertility and increased
post-implantation loss in the

5,600 mg/kg/day group, the fertility and reproductive endpoints NOAEL
was determined to be 1,867 mg/kg/day. There were no effects on
offspring survival, body weight and development up to post-natal day 4.
A NOAEL of 5,600 mg/kg/day was concluded for developmental effects.
Based on this information, there is no concern at this time for
increased sensitivity to infants and children to isobutane when used as
an inert ingredient in pesticide formulations and a safety factor
analysis has not been used to assess risk. For the same reason, EPA has
determined that an additional safety factor is not needed to protect
the safety of infants and children.

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

    Given the lack of concern for hazard posed by isobutane, EPA
concludes that there are no dietary or aggregate dietary/non-dietary
risks of concern as a result of exposure to isobutane in food and water
or from residential exposure. Residues of concern are not anticipated
for dietary exposure (food and drinking water) or for residential
exposure (dermal and inhalation) from the use of isobutane as an inert
ingredient in pesticide products. As discussed above, EPA expects
aggregate exposure to isobutane to pose no appreciable dietary risk
given that the data show a lack of any systemic toxicity at doses up to
1,867 mg/kg/day and a lack of any apparent developmental effects.
    Taking into consideration all available information on isobutane,
EPA has determined that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm to
any population subgroup, including infants and children, will result
from aggregate exposure to isobutane under reasonable foreseeable
circumstances. Therefore, the establishment of an exemption from
tolerance under 40 CFR 180.910 for residues of isobutane when used as
an inert ingredient in pesticide formulations applied pre- and post-
harvest and under 40 CFR 180.930 for residues of isobutane when used as
an inert ingredient in pesticide formulations applied to animals, is
safe under FFDCA section 408.

V. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    An analytical method is not required for enforcement purposes since
the Agency is establishing an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance without any numerical limitation.

B. International Residue Limits

    In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint U.N. Food and
Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food standards
program, and it is recognized as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain
the reasons for departing from the Codex level.
    The Codex has not established a MRL for isobutane.

VI. Conclusions

    Therefore, an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance is
established under 40 CFR 180.910 and 40 CFR 180.930 for isobutane (CAS
Reg. No. 75-28-5) when used as an inert ingredient (propellant) in
pesticide formulations applied pre- and post-harvest and when applied
to animals.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This final rule establishes a tolerance under section 408(d) of
FFDCA in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and
Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this final rule has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this final rule is
not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This final rule does not contain any
information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., nor does it require any
special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under section 408(d) of FFDCA, such as the tolerance in
this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.) do not apply.
    This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or Tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
Tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or Tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian Tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this final rule. In addition,
this final rule does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any
unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Pub. L. 104-4).
    This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272
note).

VIII. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to
the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report
containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the
United States prior to publication of this final rule in the Federal
Register. This final rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,

Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: January 24, 2011.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.

0
2. In the table to Sec.  180.910 add alphabetically a new inert
ingredient to read as follows:

Sec.  180.910  Inert ingredients used pre- and post-harvest; exemptions
from the requirement of a tolerance.

* * * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Inert ingredients               Limits               Uses
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              * * * * * * *
Isobutane (CAS Reg. No. 75-28-5)  None..............  Propellant.

                              * * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

0
3. In the table to Sec.  180.930, add alphabetically a new inert
ingredient to read as follows:

Sec.  180.930  Inert ingredients applied to animals; exemptions from
the requirement of a tolerance.

* * * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Inert ingredients               Limits               Uses
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              * * * * * * *
Isobutane (CAS Reg. No. 75-28-5)  None..............  Propellant.

                              * * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2011-2265 Filed 2-1-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 118 (Wednesday, June 19, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 36653-36654]
[FR Doc No: 2013-14547]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2013-0441]

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Tombigbee River, AL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the
regulation governing the operation of the Meridian Bigbee Railroad
(MBRR) vertical lift bridge across the Tombigbee River, mile 128.6,
near Naheola, between Choctaw and Morengo Counties, Alabama. The
deviation is necessary for emergency replacement of the uphaul and
downhaul ropes. This deviation allows the bridge to remain closed to
navigation for two 10-hour closures on two consecutive weekends.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 7 a.m. July 13, 2013 through 5
p.m. July 21, 2013.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this deviation, [USCG-2013-0441] 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 Jim Wetherington, Bridge Branch
Office, Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing the
docket, call Barbara Hairston, Program Manager, Docket Operations,
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The MBRR has requested a temporary deviation
from the operating schedule for the Meridian Bigbee vertical lift
bridge across the Tombigbee River, mile 128.6, near Naheola, between
Choctaw and Morengo Counties, Alabama. The bridge has a vertical
clearance of 12 feet above ordinary high water at an elevation of 58 ft
(NGVD 29) in the closed-to-navigation position. Vessels requiring a
clearance of less than 12 feet above ordinary high water may transit
beneath the bridge during maintenance operations.
    In accordance with Title 33 CFR 117.5, the bridge must open
promptly and fully for the passage of vessels when requested or
signaled to open. This deviation will allow the bridge to remain closed
to marine traffic on July 13-14, 2013 from 7 a.m. through 5 p.m. each
day and July 20-21 from 7 a.m. through 5 p.m. each day. At all other
times, the bridge will operate in accordance with Title 33 CFR 117.5.
    The closure is necessary for the replacement of the uphaul and
downhaul ropes. Problems were discovered after an incident in which a
cable ceased to function. An inspection of the other ropes revealed
issues that must be quickly addressed. Notices will be published in the
Eighth Coast Guard District Local Notice to Mariners and will be
broadcast via the Coast Guard Broadcast Notice to Mariners System.
    Navigation on the waterway consists of tugs with and without tows,
commercial vessels, and recreational craft. Coordination between the
Coast Guard and the waterway users determined that there should not be
any significant effects on these vessels. The bridge will be unable to
open during these repairs and no alternate route is available. Vessels
that do not require an opening may pass with extreme caution.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to
its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the designated
time period. This deviation from the operating regulations is
authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: June 6, 2013.
David M. Frank,
Bridge Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2013-14547 Filed 6-18-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 107 (Tuesday, June 4, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25799-25800]
[FR Doc No: 2019-11596]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 3025-029]

Green Mountain Power Corporation; Notice of Intent To File
License Application, Filing of Pre-Application Document (Pad),
Commencement of Pre-Filing Process, and Scoping; Request for Comments
on the Pad and Scoping Document, and Identification of Issues and
Associated Study Requests

    a. Type of Filing: Notice of Intent to File License Application for
a Subsequent License and Commencing Pre-filing Process.
    b. Project No.: 3025-029.
    c. Dated Filed: March 29, 2019.
    d. Submitted By: Green Mountain Power Corporation (Green Mountain
Power).
    e. Name of Project: Kelley's Falls Project.
    f. Location: On the Piscataquog River in Hillsborough County, New
Hampshire. The project does not occupy any federal land.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: 18 CFR part 5 of the Commission's
Regulations.
    h. Potential Applicant Contact: Jason Lisai, Director of Generation
Operations, Green Mountain Power Corporation, 163 Acorn Lane,
Colchester, VT 05446; phone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    i. FERC Contact: Patrick Crile at<PHONE_NUMBER> or email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Cooperating agencies: Federal, state, local, and tribal agencies
with jurisdiction and/or special expertise with respect to
environmental issues that wish to cooperate in the preparation of the
environmental document should follow the instructions for filing such
requests described in item o below. Cooperating agencies should note
the Commission's policy that agencies that cooperate in the preparation
of the environmental document cannot also intervene. See 94 FERC ]
61,076 (2001).
    k. With this notice, we are initiating informal consultation with:
(a) The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or NOAA Fisheries under
section 7 of the Endangered Species Act and the joint agency
regulations thereunder at 50 CFR part 402; and (b) the New Hampshire
State Historic Preservation Officer, as required by section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act and the implementing regulations of
the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation at 36 CFR 800.2.
    l. With this notice, we are designating Green Mountain Power as the
Commission's non-federal representative for carrying out informal
consultation, pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species Act,
section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, and section
305(b) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act.
    m. Green Mountain Power filed with the Commission a Pre-Application
Document (PAD; including a proposed process plan and schedule),
pursuant to 18 CFR 5.6 of the Commission's regulations.
    n. A copy of the PAD is available for review at the Commission in
the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's website
(http://www.ferc.gov), using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket
number, excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to
access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY). Copies are also available by request from Mr. John Greenan
of Green Mountain Power at<PHONE_NUMBER> or via email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filing and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support.
    o. With this notice, we are soliciting comments on the PAD and
Commission staff's Scoping Document 1 (SD1), as well as study requests.
All comments on the PAD and SD1, and study requests

should be sent to the address above in paragraph h. In addition, all
comments on the PAD and SD1, study requests, requests for cooperating
agency status, and all communications to and from Commission staff
related to the merits of the potential application must be filed with
the Commission.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
all documents using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief
comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the
eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You
must include your name and contact information at the end of your
comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>In lieu of electronic filing, please send a
paper copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing
should include docket number P-3025-029.
    All filings with the Commission must bear the appropriate heading:
``Comments on Pre-Application Document,'' ``Study Requests,''
``Comments on Scoping Document 1,'' ``Request for Cooperating Agency
Status,'' or ``Communications to and from Commission Staff.'' Any
individual or entity interested in submitting study requests,
commenting on the PAD or SD1, and any agency requesting cooperating
status must do so within 60 days of the date of this notice.
    p. Although our current intent is to prepare an environmental
assessment (EA), there is the possibility that an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) will be required. The scoping process will satisfy the
NEPA scoping requirements, irrespective of whether an EA or EIS is
issued by the Commission.

Scoping Meetings

    Commission staff will hold two scoping meetings in the vicinity of
the project at the time and place noted below. The daytime meeting will
focus on resource agency, Indian tribe, and non-governmental
organization concerns, while the evening meeting is primarily for
receiving input from the public. We invite all interested individuals,
organizations, and agencies to attend one or both of the meetings, and
to assist staff in identifying particular study needs, as well as the
scope of environmental issues to be addressed in the environmental
document. The times and locations of these meetings are as follows:

Daytime Scoping Meeting

    Date: Thursday, June 27, 2019.
    Time: 9:00 a.m.
    Location: New Hampshire Institute of Politics Auditorium, Saint
Anselm College, 100 St. Anselm Drive, Goffstown, NH 03102.
    Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Evening Scoping Meeting

    Date: Thursday, June 27, 2019.
    Time: 7:00 p.m.
    Location: New Hampshire Institute of Politics Auditorium, Saint
Anselm College, 100 St. Anselm Drive, Goffstown, NH 03102.
    Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    SD1, which outlines the subject areas to be addressed in the
environmental document, was mailed to the individuals and entities on
the Commission's mailing list. Copies of SD1 will be available at the
scoping meetings, or may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.gov,
using the ``eLibrary'' link. Follow the directions for accessing
information in paragraph n. Based on all oral and written comments, a
Scoping Document 2 (SD2) may be issued. SD2 may include a revised
process plan and schedule, as well as a list of issues, identified
through the scoping process.

Environmental Site Review

    The licensee and Commission staff will conduct an environmental
site review of the project on Thursday, June 27, 2019, starting at 1:00
p.m. All participants should meet at the project's powerhouse, located
at 10 Electric St., Manchester, NH 03102.
    If you plan to attend the environmental site review, please contact
Katie Sellers of Kleinschmidt Associates at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or via
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>on or before June 24,
2019, and indicate how many participants will be attending with you.
Green Mountain Power's safety policies require that participants wear
steel-toed safety shoes to enter the powerhouse.

Meeting Objectives

    At the scoping meetings, staff will: (1) Initiate scoping of the
issues; (2) review and discuss existing conditions and resource
management objectives; (3) review and discuss existing information and
identify preliminary information and study needs; (4) review and
discuss the process plan and schedule for pre-filing activity that
incorporates the time frames provided for in Part 5 of the Commission's
regulations and, to the extent possible, maximizes coordination of
federal, state, and tribal permitting and certification processes; and
(5) discuss the appropriateness of any federal or state agency or
Indian tribe acting as a cooperating agency for development of an
environmental document.
    Meeting participants should come prepared to discuss their issues
and/or concerns. Please review the PAD in preparation for the scoping
meetings. Directions on how to obtain a copy of the PAD and SD1 are
included in item n of this document.

Meeting Procedures

    The meetings will be recorded by a stenographer and will be placed
in the public records of the project.

    Dated: May 28, 2019.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-11596 Filed 6-3-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 185 (Tuesday, September 26, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 66069]
[FR Doc No: 2023-20765]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 35001; File No. 812-15415]

Brookfield Infrastructure Income Fund Inc., et al.

September 20, 2023.

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'' or ``SEC'').

ACTION: Notice.

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

    Notice of application for an order under sections 17(d) and 57(i)
of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the ``Act'') and rule 17d-1
under the Act to permit certain joint transactions otherwise prohibited
by sections 17(d) and 57(a)(4) of the Act and rule 17d-1 under the Act.

SUMMARY OF APPLICATION: Applicants request an order to permit certain
business development companies (``BDCs'') and closed-end management
investment companies to co-invest in portfolio companies with each
other and with certain affiliated investment entities.

APPLICANTS: Brookfield Infrastructure Income Fund Inc., Brookfield
Private Real Assets Master Fund L.P., Brookfield PSG ICAV--Brookfield
Private Real Assets QIAIF Fund, Brookfield Real Assets Hybrid Access
Trust (Canada), Brookfield Super-Core Infrastructure Partners L.P.,
Brookfield Super-Core Infrastructure Partners (TE) L.P., Brookfield
Super-Core Infrastructure Partners (NUS) L.P., Brookfield Super-Core
Infrastructure Partners (CAN) L.P., Brookfield Super-Core
Infrastructure Partners (CAN) TE L.P., Brookfield Super-Core
Infrastructure Partners (ER) SCSp, Brookfield Infrastructure Debt Fund
II LP, Brookfield Infrastructure Debt Fund II-A LP, Brookfield
Infrastructure Debt Fund II-B LP, Brookfield Infrastructure Debt Fund
Europe II SCSp, Brookfield Infrastructure Debt Fund Europe II-A SCSp
RAIF, Brookfield Infrastructure Debt Fund III LP, Brookfield
Infrastructure Debt Fund III-A LP, Brookfield Infrastructure Debt Fund
III-B LP, Brookfield Infrastructure Fund III-A, L.P., Brookfield
Infrastructure Fund III-B, L.P., Brookfield Infrastructure Fund III-D,
L.P., Brookfield Infrastructure Fund III-A (CR), L.P., Brookfield
Infrastructure Fund III-D (CR), L.P., Brookfield Infrastructure Fund
IV-A, L.P., Brookfield Infrastructure Fund IV-B, L.P., Brookfield
Infrastructure Fund IV-C, L.P., Brookfield Infrastructure Fund IV-ER
SCSp, Brookfield Infrastructure Fund V (ER) SCSp, Brookfield
Infrastructure Fund V-A, L.P., Brookfield Infrastructure Fund V-B,
L.P., Brookfield Infrastructure Fund V-C, L.P., Brookfield
Infrastructure Partners L.P., Brookfield Renewable Partners LP,
Brookfield Global Transition Fund-A, L.P., Brookfield Global Transition
Fund-B, L.P., Brookfield Global Transition Fund-C, L.P., Brookfield
Global Transition Fund (ER) SCSp, Brookfield Asset Management Private
Institutional Capital Adviser (Canada), L.P., Brookfield Public
Securities Group LLC, and Brookfield Renewable Energy Group LLC.

FILING DATES: The application was filed on December 9, 2022, and
amended on June 27, 2023, August 16, 2023, and September 12, 2023.

HEARING OR NOTIFICATION OF HEARING: An order granting the requested
relief will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing.
Interested persons may request a hearing on any application by emailing
the SEC's Secretary at [email protected] and serving the
Applicants with a copy of the request by email, if an email address is
listed for the relevant Applicant below, or personally or by mail, if a
physical address is listed for the relevant Applicant below. Hearing
requests should be received by the Commission by 5:30 p.m. on October
16, 2023, and should be accompanied by proof of service on the
Applicants, in the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a certificate
of service. Pursuant to rule 0-5 under the Act, hearing requests should
state the nature of the writer's interest, any facts bearing upon the
desirability of a hearing on the matter, the reason for the request,
and the issues contested. Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing
may request notification by emailing the Commission's Secretary at
[email protected].

ADDRESSES: The Commission: [email protected]. Applicants: Brian
F. Hurley, Esq., Brookfield Infrastructure Income Fund, Inc.,
Brookfield Place, 250 Vesey Street, 15th Floor, New York, NY 10281-
1023, Michael R. Rosella, Esq. and Thomas D. Peeney, Esq., Paul
Hastings LLP, 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laura L. Solomon, Senior Counsel, or
Kyle R. Ahlgren, Branch Chief, at<PHONE_NUMBER> (Division of
Investment Management, Chief Counsel's Office).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For Applicants' representations, legal
analysis, and conditions, please refer to Applicants' third amended and
restated application, dated September 12, 2023, which may be obtained
via the Commission's website by searching for the file number at the
top of this document, or for an Applicant using the Company name search
field, on the SEC's EDGAR system. The SEC's EDGAR system may be
searched at, http://www.sec.gov/edgar/searchedgar/legacy/companysearch.html. You may also call the SEC's Public Reference Room
at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
under delegated authority.
Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-20765 Filed 9-25-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: May 10, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 90)]
[Notices]
[Page 27245-27246]
[DOCID:fr10my06-51]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0334; FRL-8067-7]

Notice of Filing of a Pesticide Petition for Establishment of
Regulations for Residues of Pirimiphos-methyl in or on Sunflower Seeds

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the initial filing of a pesticide
petition proposing the establishment of regulations for residues of
pirimiphos-methyl in or on Sunflower Seeds.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 9, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0334 and pesticide petition number PP
6E7056, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.

Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Building), 2777 S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation (8:30 a.m. to 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays). Special
arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The
Docket telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2006-0334. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the docket without change and may be made available on-line at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information

provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or e-
mail. The Federal regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access''
system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you
send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through
regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and
included as part of the comment that is placed in the docket and made
available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot
contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your
comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters,
any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the docket index.
Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly
available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either in the electronic docket at http://www.regulations.gov
,or, if only available in hard copy, at the OPP

Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Building), 2777 S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA. The hours of operation
of this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket telephone number is (703)
305-5805.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shaja R. Brothers, Registration
Division (7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
    This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular
entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.

B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.

    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. What Action is the Agency Taking?

    EPA is printing a summary of a pesticide petition received under
section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21
U.S.C. 346a, proposing the establishment of regulations in 40 CFR
180.409 for residues of pirimiphos-methyl in or on sunflower seeds. EPA
has determined that this pesticide petition contains data or
information regarding the elements set forth in FFDCA section
408(d)(2); however, EPA has not fully evaluated the sufficiency of the
submitted data at this time or whether the data support granting of the
pesticide petition. Additional data may be needed before EPA rules on
this pesticide petition.
    Pursuant to 40 CFR 180.7(f), a summary of the petition included in
this notice, prepared by the petitioner along with a description of the
analytical method available for the detection and measurement of the
pesticide chemical residues is available on EPA's Electronic Docket at
http://www.regulations.gov. To locate this information on the home page

of EPA's Electronic Docket, select ``Quick Search'' and type the OPP
docket ID number. Once the search has located the docket, clicking on
the ``Docket ID'' will bring up a list of all documents in the docket
for the pesticide including the petition summary.

New Tolerance

    PP 6E7056. Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4), 681
Highway 1 South, North Brunswick, NJ 08902-3390, proposes to establish
a tolerance for residues of the insecticide pirimiphos-methyl in or on
sunflower seeds at 10 parts per million (ppm). The samples were
analyzed using the working method titled ``Pirimiphos-Methyl: Magnitude
of the Residue on Sunflower'', a method very similar to the reference
method, ``Determination of Residues of Pirimiphos-methyl and its
Phosphorus-containing metabolites in Crops, Water and Animal Tissues.
Residue Analytical Method No. 11A, ICI Plant Protection Limited.'' No
analysis of metabolites was conducted.
    Sunflower seeds are blended with 20% acetone/hexane, filtered, and
then partitioned with hexane/acetonitrile to remove the oil. Sunflower
oil samples are dissolved in hexane and partitioned with hexane/
acetonitrile to remove the oil. The combined acetonitrile layers are
concentrated prior to cleanup. Processed meal samples are homogenized
with 20% acetone/hexane, filtered, and then concentrated. Oil is
removed via a hexane/acetonitrile partition. Samples from all matrices
are then cleaned up by a Florisil cleanup procedure. All samples are
analyzed for pirimiphos-methyl using a Hewlett-Packard 5890 gas
chromatograph with a flame photometric (FPD) operated in the phosphorus
mode (526 nm filter).
    Method suitability was evaluated both prior to sample analysis and
concurrently with sample analysis. The method was validated prior to
sample analysis using commercially obtained dried sunflower root. The
method validation recoveries ranged from 81 to 92% in seeds, 85 to 106%
in meal, and 80 to 93% in oil. Concurrent recoveries obtained during
sample analysis ranged from 85 to 106% in seeds, 78 to 92% in meal, and
86 to 94% in oil.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Agricultural commodities, Feed additives,
Food additives, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    Dated: April 28, 2006.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

[FR Doc. E6-6922 Filed 5-9-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register: September 25, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 187)]
[Notices]
[Page 55571-55572]
[DOCID:fr25se08-90]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 58612]

Order Granting Temporary, Conditional Relief From the Net Capital
Rule for Barclays Capital, Inc.

September 22, 2008.
    Barclays Capital, Inc. (``Barclays Capital'') is a broker-dealer
registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''). Barclays Capital's ultimate holding company is
Barclays Group (``Barclays Group''), which is supervised by the United
Kingdom Financial Services Authority. Barclays Group, through Barclays
Capital, has entered into an agreement to purchase substantially all of
the assets, businesses and personnel of Lehman Brothers Inc.
(``Lehman'').
    On November 9, 2005, the Commission issued an Order approving
Lehman's application to use the alternative method of computing net
capital contained in Appendix E (``Appendix E'') to Rule 15c3-1 (17 CFR
240.15c3-1e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange
Act''). In a September 19, 2008 letter to the Commission, Barclays
Capital and Barclays Group applied to the Commission for an exemption
that would permit Barclays Capital, as successor to a substantial
portion of Lehman's assets and liabilities, to continue to use for a
temporary period the alternative method of computing net capital
contained in Appendix E solely when computing capital charges for the
positions it acquires from Lehman.
    Pursuant to paragraph (b)(3) of Rule 15c3-1, the Commission may,
upon written application, exempt from the provisions of Rule 15c3-1,
either unconditionally or on specified terms and conditions, any broker
or dealer who satisfies the Commission that, because of the special
nature of its business, its financial position, and the safeguards it
has established for the protection of customers' funds and securities,
it is not necessary in the public interest or for the protection of
investors to subject the particular broker or dealer to the provisions
of Rule 15c3-1.
    In its letter, Barclays Capital and Barclays Group have represented
to the Commission that until such time as the Commission acts on
Barclays Capital's application to use the alternate net capital
treatment and supervision on a consolidated basis, Barclays Capital
will:
    (1) File a draft application promptly, and cooperate and file with
the Commission a plan to complete all requirements of such application
process (including a timeline) and file a completed application in
accordance with Appendix E to Exchange Act Rule 15c3-1 within 180 days
of the bankruptcy court's approval of Barclays' acquisition of Lehman's
assets. In the event Barclays Capital will not be able to file a
completed application with respect to the various provisions related to
VaR Models, Barclays Capital will promptly inform the Commission of
such; and

    (2) Devote the appropriate resources and personnel to support such
alternate net capital treatment and supervision on a consolidated
basis, including any additional conditions the Commission may find to
be necessary or appropriate in the public interest or for the
protection of investors.
    In addition, Barclays Capital stated in its letter that, based on a
pro-forma net capital computation, it would have in excess of $6.5
billion in Tentative Net Capital, as defined.
    In order to facilitate both a smooth transition of the Lehman
assets and liabilities to Barclays Capital and continued oversight of
this business, the Commission believes some additional conditions are
necessary, as follows:
    (1) Until such time as the Commission determines otherwise,
Barclays Capital must maintain at least $6 billion in Tentative Net
Capital;
    (2) Until such time as the Commission determines otherwise, the
basic market risk and credit risk computations for the positions
Barclays Capital acquires from Lehman must be done using the modeling
infrastructure used by Lehman prior to the transfer of Lehman's assets
and liabilities to Barclays Capital; and
    (3) Until such time as the Commission determines otherwise, the
basic market risk and credit risk computations must be supervised by
individuals who fully understand the operation of Lehman's models
(including the inputs and techniques unique to Lehman's models) and the
securities that Lehman has been permitted to model, and that have at
least one year of experience working with Lehman's models. According to
Barclays Capital's letter, it has agreed to acquire substantially all
personnel of Lehman, such that it should have employees that meet these
requirements on its staff to continue to meet this condition for the
exemption.
    Barclays Capital will need to maintain Tentative Net Capital of at
least $6 billion. By increasing its Tentative Net Capital to at least
$6 billion, Barclays Capital will significantly improve its financial
position. In addition, the movement of these accounts from Lehman to
Barclays Capital will further protect customers by providing for a
seamless transfer of customers' accounts from Lehman to a financially
sound broker-dealer. Further, this temporary relief is specific to the
business Barclays Capital purchases from Lehman, using models already
reviewed and approved by the Commission, and the computations will be
performed by persons familiar to Lehman's models and processes. This
relief will extend only until the Commission acts on Barclays Capital's
application to compute market and credit risk capital charges pursuant
to Appendix E, which Barclays Capital has agreed to submit within 180
days of the bankruptcy court's approval of Barclays Capital's
acquisition of Lehman's assets. As such, because of the special nature
of Barclays Capital's business, its financial position, and the
safeguards it has established for the protection of customers' funds
and securities, the Commission finds that approval of this request,
subject to the fulfillment by Barclays Capital and its ultimate holding
company Barclays Group of these representations and conditions, is
appropriate in the public interest or for the protection of investors.
    Accordingly,
    It is ordered, under paragraph (b)(3) of Rule 15c3-1 (17 CFR
240.15c3-1) under the Exchange Act, that Barclays Capital may calculate
capital charges for the positions it purchases from Lehman Brothers
Inc. using the market risk standards of Appendix E to compute a
deduction for market risk on some or all of the positions, instead of
the provisions of paragraphs (c)(2)(vi) and (c)(2)(vii) of Rule 15c3-1,
and using the credit risk standards of Appendix E to compute a
deduction for credit risk on the credit exposures arising from
transactions in derivatives instruments, instead of the provision of
paragraph (c)(2)(iv) of Rule 15c3-1, subject to the fulfillment by
Barclays Capital and Barclays Group of the representations and
conditions set forth above.

    By the Commission.
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-22503 Filed 9-24-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 50 (Tuesday, March 15, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13784-13786]
[FR Doc No: 2016-05775]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RD16-2-000]

Proposed Agency Information Collection

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DOE.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) invites
public comment in Docket No. RD16-2-000 on a proposed change to
collections of information FERC-725P (OMB Control No. 1902-0269) and
FERC-725P1 (OMB Control No. 1902-0280) that the Commission is
submitting to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) pursuant to the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The Commission previously issued a
Notice in the Federal Register (81 FR 230, January 5, 2016) requesting
public comments. The Commission received no comments and is making this
notation in the submittals to OMB.

DATES: Comments regarding the proposed information collections must be
received on or before April 14, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Comments filed with OMB, identified by the OMB Control Nos.
1902-0269 (FERC-725P) and 1902-0280 (FERC-725P1), should be sent via
email to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Attention: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission Desk Officer. The Desk Officer may also be reached via
telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    A copy of the comments should also be sent to the Commission, in
Docket No. RD16-2-000, by either of the following methods:
     eFiling at Commission's Web site: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp.
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    Instructions: All submissions must be formatted and filed in
accordance with submission guidelines at: http://www.ferc.gov/help/submission-guide.asp. For user assistance contact FERC Online Support
by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by phone at:<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll-free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> for TTY.
    Docket: Users interested in receiving automatic notification of
activity in this docket or in viewing/downloading comments and
issuances in this docket may do so at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/docs-filing.asp.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Brown may be reached by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, and fax at (202)
273-0873.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Titles: FERC-725P (Mandatory Reliability Standards: Reliability
Standard PRC-005-3) and FERC-725P1 (Mandatory Reliability Standards:
PRC-005 Reliability Standard)
    OMB Control Nos.: 1902-0269 (FERC-725P) and 1902-0280 (FERC-725P1)
    Type of Request: Three-year extension of the FERC-725P1 information
collection requirements with the stated

changes to the current reporting and record retention requirements, and
elimination of the requirements of FERC-725P.
    Abstract: Reliability Standard PRC-005-6 (Protection System,
Automatic Reclosing, and Sudden Pressure Relaying Maintenance) replaces
or supplements requirements from previous versions of the PRC-005
Reliability Standard, which are approved under FERC-725P and FERC-
725P1. The requirements and associated burden of Reliability Standard
PRC-005-6 will be included in FERC-725P1.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In the future, to consolidate reporting requirements
associated with the PRC Standards, the Commission plans to transfer
the burden associated with Reliability Standard PRC-005-6 to FERC-
725G (OMB Control No. 1902-0252) and to remove it from FERC-725P1.
Note that, if approved by OMB, the FERC-725P (a temporary collection
number) will have a 0 burden and will be eliminated by this action
and the changes in Docket No. RD16-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission requires the information collected by the FERC-725P1
to implement the statutory provisions of section 215 of the Federal
Power Act (FPA).\2\ On August 8, 2005, Congress enacted into law the
Electricity Modernization Act of 2005, which is Title XII, Subtitle A,
of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct 2005).\3\ EPAct 2005 added a
new section 215 to the FPA, which required a Commission-certified
Electric Reliability Organization (ERO) to develop mandatory and
enforceable Reliability Standards, which are subject to Commission
review and approval. Once approved, the Reliability Standards may be
enforced by the ERO subject to Commission oversight, or the Commission
can independently enforce Reliability Standards.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 16 U.S.C. 824o (2012).
    \3\ Energy Policy Act of 2005, Public Law 109-58, Title XII,
Subtitle A, 119 Stat. 594, 941 (codified at 16 U.S.C. 824o).
    \4\ 16 U.S.C. 824o(e)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On February 3, 2006, the Commission issued Order No. 672,
implementing section 215 of the FPA.\5\ Pursuant to Order No. 672, the
Commission certified one organization, North American Electric
Reliability Corporation (NERC), as the ERO.\6\ The Reliability
Standards developed by the ERO and approved by the Commission apply to
users, owners, and operators of the Bulk-Power System as set forth in
each Reliability Standard. On November 13, 2015, NERC filed a petition
for Commission approval of proposed Reliability Standard PRC-005-6
(Protection System, Automatic Reclosing, and Sudden Pressure Relaying
Maintenance). NERC also requested approval of the proposed
implementation plan for PRC-005-6, and the retirement of previous
versions of Reliability Standard PRC-005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Rules Concerning Certification of the Electric Reliability
Organization; and Procedures for the Establishment, Approval, and
Enforcement of Electric Reliability Standards, Order No. 672, FERC
Stats. & Regs. ] 31,204, order on reh'g, Order No. 672-A, FERC
Stats. & Regs. ] 31,212 (2006).
    \6\ North American Electric Reliability Corp., 116 FERC ]
61,062, order on reh'g and compliance, 117 FERC ] 61,126 (2006),
order on compliance, 118 FERC ] 61,190, order on reh'g, 119 FERC ]
61,046 (2007), aff'd sub nom. Alcoa Inc. v. FERC, 564 F.3d 1342
(D.C. Cir. 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NERC explained in its petition that Reliability Standard PRC-005-6
represents an improvement upon the most recently-approved version of
the standard, PRC-005-4.\7\ FERC approved the proposed Reliability
Standard PRC-005-6 on December 18, 2015.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ As noted in NERC's petition, NERC filed a separate motion to
delay implementation of the approved, but not yet effective,
versions of the PRC-005 Reliability Standard in Docket Nos. RM14-8-
000 (PRC-005-3), RD15-3-000 (PRC-005-3(i)), and RM15-9-000 (PRC-005-
4) until after the Commission issues an order or rule regarding
proposed PRC-005-6. NERC's motion was granted in a delegated letter
order issued December 4, 2015. See North American Elec. Reliability
Corp., Docket Nos. RM14-8-000 et al. (Dec. 4, 2015) (delegated
letter order).
    \8\ The Delegated Letter Order is available in FERC's eLibrary
at http://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/common/opennat.asp?fileID=14076238.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Type of Respondents: Transmission Owners (TO), Generator Owners
(GO), and Distribution Providers (DP).
    Estimate of Annual Burden: \9\ Estimates for the changes to burden
and cost due to Docket No. RD16-2-000 follow.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The Commission defines ``burden'' as the total time, effort,
or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain,
retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a federal
agency. For further information, refer to 5 CFR 1320.3.

                                                               Changes Made in RD16-2-000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Annual number                                                                      Total annual
 Requirements in reliability standard     Number of     of responses    Total number    Average burden and cost    Total annual burden       cost per
                                         respondents   per respondent   of responses         per response            (hours) and cost       respondent
                                                  (1)             (2)   (1)*(2) = (3)  (4).....................  (3)*(4) = (5)..........             ($)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             FERC-725P (Reduction due to Replacement of PRC-005-3) \10\ \11\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One-time review of existing plant and        \12\ 937              -1            -937  2 hrs.; $146............  -1,874 hrs.; -$136,802.            -146
 substation sites to determine which
 ones fall under PRC-005-3
 [reduction].
One-time review and adjustment of            \13\ 288              -1            -288  8 hrs.; $584............  -2,304 hrs.; -$168,192.            -584
 existing program [reduction].
                                                                      ----------------                          -------------------------
    Total Net Decrease to FERC-725P..  ..............  ..............          -1,225  ........................  -4,178 hrs.; -$304,994.  ..............
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       FERC-725P1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replacement of PRC-005-4 14 15--One-            1,287              -1          -1,287  8 hrs.; $522.72.........  -10,296 hrs.; -                 -522.72
 time review of sudden pressure relay                                                                             $672,740.64.
 maintenance program and adjustment
 (Burden Reduction).
Implementation of PRC-005-6--One-time        \17\ 937               1             937  2 hrs.; $145............  1,874 hrs.; $135,396.50          144.50
 review of existing plant and
 substation sites to determine which
 ones fall under PRC-005-6 \16\
 (Burden Increase).
Implementation of PRC-005-6--One-time             288               1             288  8.5 hrs.; $614..........  2,448 hrs.; $176,868...             614
 review and adjustment of existing
 program for reclosing relays and
 associated equipment \18\ (Burden
 Increase).
Implementation of PRC-005-6--One-time           1,287               1           1,287  8 hrs.; $531.60.........  10,296 hrs.;                     531.60
 review and adjustment of existing                                                                                $684,169.20.
 program for sudden pressure relays
 \19\ (Burden Increase).
                                                                      ----------------                          -------------------------
    Total Net Increase to FERC-725P1.  ..............  ..............          +1,225  ........................  4,322 hrs.; $323,693.06  ..............
    Total Net Change, due to RD16-2..  ..............  ..............               0  ........................  144 hrs.; $18,699.06...  ..............
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comments: Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the collections of
information are necessary for the proper performance of the functions
of the Commission, including whether the information will have
practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimates of the
burden and cost of the collections of information, including the
validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance
the quality, utility and clarity of the information collections; and
(4) ways to minimize the burden of the collections of information on
those who are to respond, including the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The estimates for cost per response are derived using the
following formula: Average Burden Hours per Response * $73 per Hour
= Average Cost per Response. The hourly cost figure comes from the
average of the salary plus benefits for a manager and an engineer
(rounded to the nearest dollar). The figures are taken from the
Bureau of Labor Statistics [BLS] at (http://bls.gov/oes/current/naics3_221000.htm).
    \11\ Implemented in Docket No. RM14-8.
    \12\ This figure reflects the generator owners and transmission
owners identified in the NERC Compliance Registry as of May 28,
2014.
    \13\ This figure is a subset of GOs and TOs, as discussed in
Order 803 (Docket No. RM14-8), P 41.
    \14\ Implemented in Docket No. RM15-9.
    \15\ The estimates for cost per response are derived using the
following formula: Average Burden Hours per Response * $65.34 per
Hour = Average Cost per Response. The hourly cost figure comes from
the average of the wages plus benefits for an engineer (rounded to
the nearest dollar). The figures are based on information from the
Bureau of Labor Statistics (at http://bls.gov/oes/current/naics3_221000.htm).
    \16\ The average hourly cost (wages plus benefits) is estimated
to be $72.25 (and is based on BLS May 2014 Data, updated 8/2015). It
is based on the average of the hourly wages plus benefits of:
     Management (occupation code 11-0000, $78.04 per hour)
and
     electrical engineer (occupation code 17-2071, $66.45
per hour).
    \17\ This figure reflects the generator owners and transmission
owners identified in the NERC Compliance Registry as of May 28,
2014.
    \18\ The average hourly cost (wages plus benefits) is estimated
to be $72.25 (and is based on BLS May 2014 Data, updated 8/2015). It
is based on the average of the hourly wages plus benefits of:
     Management (occupation code 11-0000, $78.04 per hour)
and
     electrical engineer (occupation code 17-2071, $66.45
per hour).
    \19\ The average hourly cost (wages plus benefits) is estimated
to be $66.45, based on BLS estimates for an electrical engineer.

    Dated: March 9, 2016.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-05775 Filed 3-14-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 109 (Tuesday, June 7, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 36535]
[FR Doc No: 2016-13407]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Notice of Commission Staff Attendance

    The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission hereby gives notice that
members of the Commission's staff may attend the following meetings
related to the transmission planning activities of the PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C. (PJM):

PJM Planning Committee

June 9, 2016, 9:30 a.m.-12:00 p.m. (EST)

PJM Transmission Expansion Advisory Committee

June 9, 2016, 11:00 a.m.-3:00 p.m. (EST)

    The above-referenced meetings will be held at: PJM Conference and
Training Center, PJM Interconnection 2750 Monroe Boulevard Audubon, PA
19403.
    The above-referenced meetings are open to stakeholders. Further
information may be found at www.pjm.com.
    The discussions at the meetings described above may address matters
at issue in the following proceedings:

Docket No. ER16-453, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. and Northeast
Transmission Development, LLC
Docket No. ER16-736, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
Docket No. ER14-972, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
Docket No. ER14-1485, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
Docket Nos. ER13-1944, et al., PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., et al.
Docket No. ER15-1344, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
Docket No. ER15-1387, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. and Potomac Electric
Power Company
Docket No. ER15-2562, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
Docket No. ER15-2563, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
Docket No. EL15-18, Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. v.
PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
Docket No. EL15-41, Essential Power Rock Springs, LLC, et. al. v. PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C.
Docket No. ER15-2114, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. and Transource West
Virginia, LLC
Docket No. EL15-79, TransSource, LLC v. PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
Docket No. EL15-95, Delaware Public Service Commission, et. al., v. PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C., et. al.
Docket No. EL15-67, Linden VFT, LLC v. PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
Docket No. EL05-121, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
Docket No. ER13-198, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
Docket No. ER16-1335, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
Docket No. ER16-1232, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
Docket No. ER16-1499, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

    For more information, contact the following: Jonathan Fernandez,
Office of Energy Market Regulation, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>Alina Halay,
Office of Energy Market Regulation, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: June 1, 2016.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-13407 Filed 6-6-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: March 24, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 56)]
[Notices]
[Page 14170-14171]
[DOCID:fr24mr10-67]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0001]

Medical Device Epidemiology Network: Developing Partnership
Between the Center for Devices and Radiological Health and Academia;
Public Workshop

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of public workshop.

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

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing a public
workshop entitled ``Medical Device Epidemiology Network (MDEpiNet):
Developing Partnership Between the Center for Devices and Radiological
Health and Academia.'' The purpose of the public workshop is to
facilitate discussion among FDA and academic researchers with expertise
in epidemiology and health services research on issues related to the
methodology for studying medical device performance.
    Date and Time: The public workshop will be held on April 30, 2010,
from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Participants are encouraged to arrive early to
ensure time for parking and security screening before the meeting.
Security screening will begin at 7 a.m., and registration will begin at
7:30 a.m.
    Location: The public workshop will be held at the FDA White Oak
Campus,

10903 New Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD 20993.
    Contact: Kristen Van Dole, Center for Devices and Radiological
Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Silver
Spring, MD 20993,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
Mary Beth Ritchey, Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH),
Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring,
MD 20993,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Registration: Email your name, title, organization affiliation,
address, and email contact information to Kristen Van Dole (see
Contact) by April 19, 2010. There is no fee to attend the public
workshop, but attendees must register in advance. Registration will be
on a first-come, first-served basis and we ask that one person per
institution be selected to represent the entity at the workshop. Non-
U.S. citizens are subject to additional security screening, and they
should register as soon as possible. If you need special accommodations
because of a disability, please contact Mary Beth Ritchey (see Contact)
at least 7 days before the public workshop.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Why Are We Holding This Public Workshop?

    The purpose of the public workshop is to facilitate discussion
among FDA and the academic epidemiology and health services research
community on issues related to the methodology of studies for medical
device performance.
    We aim to reach out to academic centers that have epidemiologic,
statistical, and clinically relevant expertise to establish a network
that will work with FDA experts to determine the evidence gaps and
questions, datasets and approaches for conducting robust analytic
studies and improve our understanding of the performance of medical
devices (including comparative effectiveness studies). The centers
participating in the network will be expected to take part in other
FDA-hosted scientific workshops that address methods for medical device
comparative analyses, best practices and best design and analysis
methods.

II. Who is the Target Audience for This Public Workshop? Who Should
Attend This Public Workshop?

    This workshop is open to all interested parties. The target
audience is comprised of academic researchers with experience in
epidemiology or health services research with an interest in medical
device outcome and epidemiologic study methodology.

III. What Are the Topics We Intend to Address at the Public Workshop?

    We intend to discuss a large number of issues at the workshop,
including, but not limited to:
     Gaps and challenges in medical device outcomes and
epidemiologic studies;
     Creation of the Medical Device Epidemiology Network
(MdEpiNet) infrastructure; and
     Opportunities for medical device epidemiologic research
and partnerships between CDRH and Academia.

IV. Where Can I Find Out More About This Public Workshop?

    Background information on the public workshop, registration
information, the agenda, information about lodging, and other relevant
information will be posted, as it becomes available, on the Internet at
http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/meetings.html.

    Dated: March 18, 2010.
Leslie Kux,
Acting Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2010-6446 Filed 3-23-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-S