[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 150 (Friday, August 3, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 38198]
[FR Doc No: 2018-16595]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-83737; File No. SR-BOX-2018-20]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BOX Options Exchange LLC; Notice
of Withdrawal of Proposed Rule Change To Amend BOX Rule 7300
(Preferenced Orders) To Provide an Additional Allocation Preference to
Preferred Market Makers

July 30, 2018.
    On June 13, 2018, BOX Options Exchange LLC (the ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant
to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 \1\ and Rule
19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to amend Exchange Rule 7300
(Preferenced Orders) to provide an additional allocation preference to
Preferred Market Makers. The proposed rule change was published for
comment in the Federal Register on July 2, 2018.\3\ The Commission
received one comment letter on the proposal.\4\ On July 25, 2018, the
Exchange withdrew the proposed rule change (SR-BOX-2018-20).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83525 (June 26,
2018), 83 FR 31006.
    \4\ See Letter to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, from
Richard J. McDonald, Susquehanna International Group, LLP, dated
July 23, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-16595 Filed 8-2-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 222 (Monday, November 18, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 63577-63579]
[FR Doc No: 2019-24905]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2019-0898]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Sunken Vessel Salvage; Port Sutton Channel; Tampa,
Florida

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for
navigable waters within a 150-foot radius of a sunken vessel, in Port
Sutton Channel in Tampa, FL. The safety zone is needed to protect
personnel, vessels, and the marine environment from potential hazards
created by the sunken vessel and its salvage. Entry of vessels or
persons into this zone is prohibited unless specifically authorized by
the Captain of the Port St. Petersburg.

DATES: This rule is effective without actual notice from November 18,
2019 through December 1, 2019. For the purposes of enforcement, actual
notice will be used from November 12, 2019 through November 18, 2019.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2019-0898 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Marine Science Technician First Class Michael
Shackleford, Sector St. Petersburg Prevention Department, Coast Guard;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice
and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because it is impracticable. Immediate action
is needed to provide for the safety of vessel traffic in the port and
to provide a safe work area around the vessel that sunk on November 11,
2019. There is insufficient time to publish a NPRM.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of
this rule would be impracticable because immediate action is needed to
respond to the incident.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C.
70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231). The Captain of the Port St.
Petersburg (COTP) has determined that potential hazards associated with
the sunken vessel in Port Sutton Channel, Florida will be a safety
concern for anyone within a 150 foot-radius of the sunken vessel. This
rule is needed to protect personnel and vessels in the navigable waters
within the safety zone while the vessel remains sunk.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a safety zone from 5 p.m. on November 12,
2019 through 9 a.m. on December 1, 2019. The safety zone will cover all
navigable waters within a 150-foot radius of a sunken vessel in Port
Sutton Channel. The duration of the zone is intended to protect
personnel and vessels in these navigable waters while the sunken vessel
is salvaged. No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the safety
zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated
representative.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses

based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we
discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This rule has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
    This regulatory action determination is based on: (1) The safety
zone will be enforced for 20 days; (2) although persons and vessels are
prohibited to enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within the
regulated area without authorization from the Captain of the Port St.
Petersburg or a designated representative, they may operate in the
surrounding area during the enforcement period; and (3) the Coast Guard
will provide notification of the safety zone to the local maritime
community by a Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any
vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

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

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

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

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01 and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series),
which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have
determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. This rule involves a safety zone lasting 20 days that will
prohibit entry within a 150-foot radius of a sunken vessel in Port
Sutton Channel. It is categorically excluded from further review under
paragraph L60(d) in Table 3-1 of U.S. Coast Guard Environmental
Planning Implementing Procedures. A Record of Environmental
Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket
where indicated under ADDRESSES.

G. Protest Activities

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

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-
6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T07-0898 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T07-0898   Safety Zone; Sunken Vessel; Port Sutton Channel,
Tampa, FL.

    (a) Regulated area. The following area is established as a safety
zone. All

waters of Port Sutton Channel within a 150-foot radius of a sunken
vessel located at 27[deg]54'14'' N, 082[deg]24'57'' W, in Tampa, FL.
    (b) Definition. The term ``designated representative'' means Coast
Guard Patrol Commanders, including Coast Guard coxswains, petty
officers, and other officers operating Coast Guard vessels, and
Federal, state, and local officers designated by or assisting the
Captain of the Port St. Petersburg in the enforcement of the regulated
areas.
    (c) Regulations. (1) All persons and vessels are prohibited from
entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within the
regulated area unless authorized by the Captain of the Port St.
Petersburg or a designated representative.
    (2) Designated representatives may control vessel traffic
throughout the enforcement area as determined by the prevailing
conditions.
    (3) Persons and vessels may request authorization to enter, transit
through, anchor in, or remain within the regulated areas by contacting
the Captain of the Port St. Petersburg by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>,
or a designated representative via VHF radio on channel 16. If
authorization is granted by the Captain of the Port St. Petersburg or a
designated representative, all persons and vessels receiving such
authorization must comply with the instructions of the Captain of the
Port St. Petersburg or a designated representative.
    (d) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced daily from 5
p.m. on November 12, 2019 through 9 a.m. on December 1, 2019.

    Dated: November 12, 2019.
Matthew A. Thompson,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port St. Petersburg.
[FR Doc. 2019-24905 Filed 11-15-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

WASHINGTON, D.C.  20460

OFFICE OF

PREVENTION, PESTICIDES, AND

TOXIC SUBSTANCES

TXR No:	0053479

MEMORANDUM

DATE:	July 19, 2005

SUBJECT:	PYRACLOSTROBIN: Third Report of the Dose Adequacy Review Team
(DART)

PC code: 099100

DP Barcode: D315662

FROM:	Jessica Kidwell, Executive Secretary

Dose Adequacy Review Team

Health Effects Division (7509C)

THROUGH:	Jess Rowland, Chair

Dose Adequacy Review Team

Health Effects Division (7509C)

TO:		Ghazi Dannan, Toxicologist

Paula Deschamp, Chief

Registration Action Branch 3

Health Effects Division (7509C)

John Bazuin/Cynthia Giles-Parker, PM Team 22

Fungicide Branch

Registration Division (7505C)

On March 31, 2005 the DART met to discuss BASF’s request to terminate
a supplemental female mouse carcinogenicity study.  Attached please find
the DART’s final report and recommendations.

Note to Registrant: Please reference this DART memo in the formal
submission of the supplemental study.

Team Members in Attendance at the March 31, 2005 DART Meeting:
(Signature indicates concurrence with report unless otherwise noted:)

Karl Baetcke						____________________________________

William Burnam					____________________________________

Marion Copley					____________________________________

Jessica Kidwell (Executive Secretary)
____________________________________

Jess Rowland						____________________________________

Yung Yang						____________________________________

Other Attendees: Ghazi Dannan (HED/RAB3), Kelly O’Rourke (HED/RAB3),
Paula Deschamp (HED/RAB3), Robert Mitkus (HED/RAB1), conference call
with Health Canada’s PMRA (Catherine Adcock, Andrea Katynski)

The DART met on March 31, 2006 to discuss BASF’s request to terminate
the single dose supplemental female mouse carcinogenicity study based on
the study results through month six.  This data was submitted in
response to the DART’s request in a March 7, 2005 memo (TXR No.
0053177) to continue the study through 6 months to see if decreases in
body weight/body weight gain are temporary or if the body weight
divergence is sustained.

Upon review of the Registrant’s submission, the DART agreed that the
dose level of 360 ppm in the supplemental female mouse carcinogenicity
study can be terminated.  This was based on sustained and severe
decreases in body weight (20-24%)/body weight gain (46-52%) compared to
control from month four through month six.

It is evident from the observed toxicity at 6-months that a dose of 360
ppm is excessive for female mice.  In the previous carcinogenicity study
(MRID No. 45118330), no toxicity was seen at 180 ppm, the highest dose
tested.  Taken together, the results of these studies show that an
“optimal” dose that would not elicit excessive toxicity would be
higher than 180 ppm but certainly lower than 360 ppm.  Since the dose
tested in the previous study was one-half of the dose that caused
excessive toxicity in the current study after only 6 months of treatment
and because of the narrow “dose spread” between the toxic and
non-toxic doses, the DART determined that no further testing is required
pending formal submission of the 6-month supplemental study.

Pyraclostrobin                                 Dose Adequacy Review Team
Report                     Final

( PAGE  3 (


50135 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 161 / Wednesday, August 20, 2003 / Notices to demonstrate that the issuance of the Harquahala Generating Station permit was not in compliance with requirements of the Clean Air Act on the grounds raised.

Dated: August 6, 2003. Deborah Jordan, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 9. [ FR Doc. 03   21350 Filed 8   19   03; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ OPPT   2003   0036; FRL   7319   2]

National Advisory Committee for Acute Exposure Guideline Levels for Hazardous Substances; Notice of Public Meeting AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: A meeting of the National Advisory Committee for Acute Exposure Guideline Levels for Hazardous Substances ( NAC/ AEGL Committee) will be held on September 16   18, 2003, in Washington, DC. At this meeting, the NAC/ AEGL Committee will address, as time permits, the various aspects of the acute toxicity and the development of Acute Exposure Guideline Levels ( AEGLs) for the following chemicals: Acetone cyanohydrin; acetonitrile; acrylic acid; butadiene; bromine; carbon monoxide; chloroacetic acid; chloroacetonitrile; dimethyl sulfate; disulfur dichloride; fluorine; isobutyronitrile; jet fuel 8; malononitrile; methanol; methylene chloride; methyl ethyl ketone; oleum; phenol; phosphorus oxychloride; phosphorus trichloride; propionitrile; styrene; sulfur dichloride; sulfur trioxide; sulfuric acid; tetrachloroethylene; 1,1,1 trichloroethane; vinyl chloride; and xylenes.

DATES: A meeting of the NAC/ AEGL Committee will be held from 10 a. m. to 5: 30 p. m. on September 16, 2003; 8: 30 a. m. to 5: 30 p. m. on September 17, 2003; and 8 a. m. to noon on September 18, 2003. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the U. S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC, Room numbers North 4437 B, C, and D.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information contact: Barbara Cunningham, Director, Environmental Assistance Division ( 7408M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460   0001; telephone number: ( 202) 554   1404; e mail address: TSCAHotline epa. gov. For technical information contact: Paul S. Tobin, Designated Federal Officer ( DFO), Economics, Exposure, and Technology Division ( 7406M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460   0001; telephone number: ( 202) 564   8557; e mail address: tobin. paul@ epa. gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

This action is directed to the public in general. This action may be of particular interest to anyone who may be affected if the AEGL values are adopted by government agencies for emergency planning, prevention, or response programs, such as EPA's Risk Management Program under the Clean Air Act and Amendments Section 112r. It is possible that other Federal agencies besides EPA, as well as State agencies and private organizations, may adopt the AEGL values for their programs. As such, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the DFO listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How Can I Get Copies of this Document and Other Related Information?

1. Docket. EPA has established an official public docket for this action under docket identification ( ID) number OPPT   2003   0036. The official public docket consists of the documents specifically referenced in this action, any public comments received, and other information related to this action. Although a part of the official docket, the public docket does not include Confidential Business Information ( CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. The official public docket is the collection of materials that is available for public viewing at the EPA Docket Center, Rm. B102 Reading Room, EPA West, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center is open from 8: 30 a. m. to 4: 30 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The EPA Docket Center Reading Room telephone number is ( 202) 566   1744 and the telephone number for the OPPT Docket, which is located in EPA Docket Center, is ( 202) 566   0280. 2. Electronic access. You may access this Federal Register document electronically through the EPA Internet under the `` Federal Register'' listings at http:// www. epa. gov/ fedrgstr/. An electronic version of the public docket is available through EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, EPA Dockets. You may use EPA Dockets at http:// www. epa. gov/ edocket/ to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the official public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Although not all docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access any of the publicly available docket materials through the docket facility identified in Unit I. B. 1. Once in the system, select `` search,'' then key in the appropriate docket ID number.

II. Meeting Procedures For additional information on the scheduled meeting, the agenda of the NAC/ AEGL Committee, or the submission of information on chemicals to be discussed at the meeting, contact the DFO listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. The meeting of the NAC/ AEGL Committee will be open to the public. Oral presentations or statements by interested parties will be limited to 10 minutes. Interested parties are encouraged to contact the DFO to schedule presentations before the NAC/ AEGL Committee. Since seating for outside observers may be limited, those wishing to attend the meeting as observers are also encouraged to contact the DFO at the earliest possible date to ensure adequate seating arrangements. Inquiries regarding oral presentations and the submission of written statements or chemical specific information should be directed to the DFO.

III. Future Meetings Another meeting of the NAC/ AEGL Committee is scheduled for December 2003 in San Antonio, TX.

List of Subjects Environmental protection, Chemicals, Hazardous substances, Health.

Dated: August 13, 2003. Margaret Schneider, Acting Director, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics.

[ FR Doc. 03   21352 Filed 8   19   03; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   S VerDate jul< 14> 2003 16: 06 Aug 19, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 20AUN1. SGM 20AUN1 OPPT 2003 0036 0001 RECEIVED OPPT NCIC 2003 August 20 7: 08AM


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 177 (Wednesday, September 12, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56251-56253]
[FR Doc No: 2012-22451]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC); New Task
Assignment for the ARAC: Establishment of Airman Testing Standards and
Training Working Group

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice

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

SUMMARY: The FAA assigned the ARAC a new task arising from
recommendations of the Airman Testing Standards and Training Aviation
Rulemaking Committee (ARC). The ARC recommended ways to ensure that the
FAA's airman testing and training materials better support reduction of
fatal general aviation accidents. The new task is to integrate 14 CFR
part 61 aeronautical knowledge and flight proficiency requirements for
the private pilot and flight instructor certificates and the instrument
rating into a single Airman Certification Standards document for each
type of certificate and rating; to develop a detailed proposal to
realign FAA training handbooks with the Airman Certification Standards
documents; and to propose knowledge test item bank questions consistent
with the integrated Airman Certification Standards documents and the
principles set forth in the ARC's recommendations.
    This action item informs the public of the new ARAC's task and
solicits membership for the new Airman Testing Standards and Training
Working Group (Working Group).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Van L. Kerns, Manager, Regulatory
Support Division, FAA Flight Standards Service, AFS 600, FAA Mike
Monroney Aeronautical Center P.O. Box 25082 Oklahoma City, OK 73125;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The FAA established ARAC to provide advice and recommendations to
the FAA Administrator on the FAA's rulemaking activities. ARAC's
objectives are to improve the development of the FAA's regulations by
providing information, advice, and recommendations related to aviation
issues.
    On September 21, 2011, the FAA chartered the ARC for the U.S.
aviation community to develop recommendations for more effective
training and testing in the areas of aeronautical knowledge and flight
proficiency required for safer operation in today's National Airspace
System (NAS).
    The FAA's charge to the ARC was to help ensure that FAA's technical
information related to existing standards for airman knowledge and
skill tests, computer testing supplements, knowledge test guides,
practical test standards and training handbooks incorporates the most
current, relevant, and effective approaches to training and testing.
The FAA specifically tasked the ARC with providing recommendations on a
process for ongoing stakeholder participation in developing the content
of these materials, and methodologies for developing better test item
bank questions. The FAA also asked the ARC to develop a prioritized
list of certificates and ratings to update.
    This new task is the FAA's response to several of the ARC's
recommendations. Establishment of the ARAC's Working Group creates a
process by which the stakeholders' real world aviation education and
training expertise can contribute to the development of materials and
methodologies. In accordance with the ARC's recommended certificate and
rating priorities, the Working Group will address the private pilot,
flight instructor, and instrument rating training and testing materials
by developing an integrated Airman Certification Standards document for
each one.
    By aligning the aeronautical knowledge testing standards required
by 14 CFR part 61 with the flight proficiency standards set out in the
existing Practical Test Standards (PTS), the integrated Airman
Certification Standard will enhance the relevance, reliability,
validity, and effectiveness of aeronautical knowledge testing and
training materials and thus support the FAA's goal of reducing fatal
general aviation accidents. The FAA is also tasking the ARAC's Working
Group to develop a detailed proposal to realign and, as appropriate,
streamline and consolidate existing FAA guidance material (e.g.,
handbooks) with each integrated Airman Certification Standards
documents; and to propose methodologies to ensure that knowledge test
item bank questions are consistent with both the Airman Certification
Standards documents and the test question development principles set
forth in the ARC's recommendations.
    In August 2012, the ARAC's Executive Committee discussed the
proposed actions for this tasking. This notice advises the public that
the FAA has assigned, and the Executive Committee has accepted, a new
task to develop the items listed below. The FAA has specifically tasked
the ARAC's Working Group to support the FAA's goal to enhance general
aviation safety and reduce the fatal general aviation accident rate by
providing:
    (1) An integrated Airman Certification Standards document that
aligns the aeronautical knowledge testing standards required by 14 CFR
part 61 with the flight proficiency standards (``Areas of Operation'')
set out in 14 CFR part 61 and the existing Practical Test Standards
(PTS) for (a) the private pilot and (b) flight instructor certificates
and (c) the instrument rating. To accomplish this task, the Working
Group should follow the ARC's recommendations to integrate appropriate
elements of aeronautical knowledge and risk management into each Area
of Operation in the current Practical Test Standards documents.
    (2) A recommendation on priorities for revision of additional
certificates and ratings, along with ways to ensure expert review of
any revisions to these documents.
    (3) A detailed proposal to realign and, as appropriate, streamline
and consolidate existing FAA guidance material (e.g., the handbooks
listed below) with the integrated Airman Certification Standards
documents developed in accordance with item (1). The Working Group will
also develop and recommend a process for review and revision of these
materials.
    (4) Proposed knowledge test item bank questions that are consistent
with both the newly developed Airman Certification Standards documents
and the test question development principles set forth in the ARC's
recommendations. The Working Group will also recommend options that
provide for expert outside review (``boarding'') of proposed questions
while safeguarding the integrity of the testing process.
    The Working Group is expected to develop a report containing each
of the listed elements. Any disagreements should be documented,
including the rationale for each position and the reasons for the
disagreement.
    In developing this report, the Working Group shall familiarize
itself with:
    1. A Report to the FAA from the Airman Testing Standards and
Training Aviation Rulemaking Committee: Recommendations to Enhance
Airman Knowledge Test Content and Its Processes and Methodologies for
Training and Testing (www.faa.gov/aircraft/draft_docs/arc).
    2. Aeronautical knowledge standards set forth in 14 CFR part 61,
Certification: Pilots, Flight Instructors, and Ground Instructors.
    3. Flight proficiency standards set forth in 14 CFR part 61,
Certification: Pilots, Flight Instructors, and Ground Instructors.
    4. FAA Airman Knowledge Test Guide (FAA-G-8082-17E).
    5. Current Practical Test Standards documents for Private Pilot
Airplane (FAA-S-8081-14B); Flight Instructor Airplane (FAA-S-8081-6C);
and Instrument Rating for Airplane, Helicopter, and Powered Lift (FAA-
S-8081-4E).
    6. Current FAA guidance materials, to include the Pilot's Handbook
of Aeronautical Knowledge (FAA-H-8083-25A); the Airplane Flying
Handbook (FAA-H-8083-3A); the Aviation Instructor's Handbook (FAA-H-
8083-9A); the Instrument Flying Handbook (FAA-H-8083-15A); and the
Instrument Procedures Handbook (FAA-H-8083-1A).

Schedule

    The recommendations must be forwarded to the ARAC Executive
Committee for review and approval no later than September 30, 2013.

ARAC Acceptance of New Task

    The ARAC's Executive Committee has accepted the task and assigned
it to the newly-established ARAC Working Group. The Working Group
serves as staff to ARAC and assists in the analysis of the assigned new
task. ARAC must review and approve the Working Group's recommendations.
If ARAC accepts the Working Group's recommendations, it will send them
to the FAA in the form of a written report.

Working Group Activity

    The Working Group must comply with the procedures adopted by ARAC.
As part of the procedures, the Working Group must:
    1. Recommend a work plan for completion of the task, including the
rationale supporting such a plan, for

consideration at the next ARAC Executive Committee meeting held
following publication of this notice.
    2. Provide a status report at each meeting of the ARAC Executive
Committee.
    3. Draft the recommendations report and required analyses and/or
any other related materials or documents.
    4. Present the final recommendations to the ARAC Executive
Committee for review and approval.

Participation in the ARAC Working Group

    The Working Group will be comprised of aviation professionals with
experience and expertise in airman training and testing, and technical
experts having an interest in the assigned new task. The FAA would like
a wide range of members to ensure that all aspects of airman testing
and training, including best practices, are considered in the
development of its recommendations.
    If you wish to become a member of the Working Group, please write
the person listed under the caption FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
expressing such desire. Describe your interest in the new task and
state the expertise you would bring to the Working Group. We must
receive all requests by October 2, 2012.
    The ARAC Executive Committee and the FAA will review the requests
and advise you whether your request is approved.
    If you are chosen for membership on the Working Group, you must
actively participate by attending all meetings and providing written
comments when requested to do so. You must devote the resources
necessary to support the Working Group in meeting any assigned
deadlines. You must keep your management chain, and those you may
represent, advised of the Working Group's activities and decisions to
ensure the proposed technical solutions do not conflict with your
sponsoring organization's position, when the subject is presented to
ARAC for approval. Once the Working Group has begun deliberations,
members will not be added or substituted without the approval of the
FAA and the Working Group chair.
    The Secretary of Transportation determined the formation and use of
ARAC is necessary and in the public interest in connection with the
performance of duties imposed on the FAA by law. ARAC meetings are open
to the public. However, ARAC Working Group's meetings are not open to
the public, except to the extent individuals with an interest and
expertise are selected to attend. The FAA will make no public
announcement of the Working Group's meetings.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on September 5, 2012.
Lirio Liu,
Acting Director, Office of Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2012-22451 Filed 9-11-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 58 (Monday, March 29, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 16347]
[FR Doc No: 2021-06365]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER21-1488-000]

Luna Storage, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based
Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced Luna Storage,
LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with an accompanying
rate tariff, noting that such application includes a request for
blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of
securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is April 12, 2021.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically may mail similar pleadings to
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in docketed
proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225
Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (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. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free,
(886) 208-3676 or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: March 22, 2021.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-06365 Filed 3-26-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


40 DATA EVALUATION REPORT 6/ 7/ 2001 Reviewed by: Chris A. Wozniak, Ph. D., Biologist, OPP / BPPD / s/ Secondary Reviewer: John L. Kough, Ph. D., Biologist, OPP / BPPD / s/ MRID No.: 453584 01 Active Ingredients: Bacillus thuringiensis strain PS149B1 ( NRRL B 21553) binary insect control proteins as expressed in maize Product Name: PS149B1 insect control proteins as expressed in maize ID No.: 068467 EUP G, 068467 EUP L, 029964 EUP R, 022964 EUP G Submission No.: S590323, S590337 Chemical No.: 006430 Bacillus thuringiensis PS149B1 proteins DP Barcode: D271578 Sponsor: Dow Agrosciences LLC, 9330 Zionsville Rd., Indianapolis, IN 46268. Authors: R. A. Herman Testing Facility: Global Environmental Chemistry Laboratory  Indianapolis Lab, Dow Agrosciences LLC, 9330 Zionsville Rd., Indianapolis, IN 46268 1054 Study Titles: Thermolability of PS149B1 binary delta endotoxin. Study Date: November 16, 2000 Study No.: 001041 Conclusion: Results indicate that the SP149B1 proteins, or at least one of them, is inactivated after exposure to 60

C for 30 minutes, based upon activity against the southern corn rootworm. It is possible that shorter times or lower temperatures may have also denatured the protein( s), but these were not tested. With the current protocol design, it is not possible to determine if one or both proteins are inactivated following heat treatment. To address this issue, the registrant should consider repeating the study under a method that would allow this distinction to be made as part of the submission for Section 3 registration.

Classification: Acceptable.

Good Laboratory Practices: This study was conducted in compliance with the Certification of Good Laboratory Practices as outlined in 40 CFR 160, with the following exceptions: purity, solubility, stability, and uniformity analyses were not conducted on the treatment mixtures applied to the test substrate or for the treated test substrates. Insect source of supply/ care and diet preparation / delivery, were conducted under non GLP conditions prior to receipt in the ECL GLP laboratory.

Purpose: To measure the lability of the two PS149B1 ICP proteins to heat.

METHODS Test substances  PS149B1 proteins used in this study were produced in Pseudomonas fluorescens. The resulting powders contained either 54 % 14 kDa protein ( TSN102172) or 37 % 44 kDa protein ( TSN102171). ELISA was performed before and after the assays in this study to confirm that the proteins were stable over the duration of the study. 41 Heat treatment and bioassay of southern corn rootworm ( SCR)  A 1: 1 active ingredient ( AI) mass ratio of the 14 kDa and 44 kDa ICP proteins were added to the surface of insect diets and allowed to dry to the surface of the agar. Treated diets were infested with neonate larvae of the southern corn rootworm ( Diabrotica undecimpunctata howardi).

The test substance was formulated in 10 mM potassium phosphate ( pH 7.5) and was prepared on each test date for the assays. The concentration was chosen to target a final concentration on the insect diet of 10 µ g AI/ cm2 of diet. Four aliquots of the test formulation were placed at different temperatures ( 60

C, 75

C, 90

C) for heat treatments or in the refrigerator for the 4

C positive control. after 30 minutes at temperature, the vials were placed on ice. A negative control treatment was also included which consisted of 10 mM potassium phosphate ( pH 7.5) alone.

Approximately 500 mL of diet was added to each of 128 wells in a bioassay tray. Surface area of each well was approximately 1.5 cm2. The test substance formulation ( 50 µ L) was applied to each of 16 wells, except for the negative control ( 10 mM potassium phosphate) where three replicates of 16 insects were treated. After the surface of the medium dried, each well was infested with a single neonate larva of SCR.

Data analysis  Each insect was weighed after the assay and the average weight for each treatment compared to the average weight for the control treatment ( 10 mM potassium phosphate). No statistical analysis was performed.

RESULTS Bioassay  Growth inhibition was used to compare treatments as the mortality in the 4

C treatment was low ( 6 %).

Southern corn rootworm TREATMENT % GROWTH INHIBITION ICP @ 4

C 70 %

ICP @ 60

C  3 %

ICP @ 75

C  3 %

ICP @ 90

C 1 %

Purity, solubility and stability studies were not carried out on the test substances for this study or on the treated test substrates. ELISA was used to demonstrate the stability of the test substance proteins at the beginning and end of the study to indicate a lack of significant change over time. Since comparisons of growth inhibition were made with test substance formulations made fresh for each assay, the relative growth inhibition is indicative of the potency of the formulation following treatment at the given temperature. 42 Results indicate that the SP149B1 proteins, or at least one of them, is inactivated after exposure to 60

C for 30 minutes. It is possible that shorter times or lower temperatures may have also denatured the protein( s), but these were not tested. With the current protocol design, it is not possible to determine if one or both proteins are inactivated following heat treatment. To address this issue, the registrant should consider repeating the study under a method that would allow this distinction to be made as part of the submission for Section 3 registration. Inclusion of a lower temperature treatment is also advised to determine the lowest temperature at which the protein( s) denature.


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 67 (Thursday, April 8, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 17879-17882]
[FR Doc No: 2010-7943]

========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 67 / Thursday, April 8, 2010 /
Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0380; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-009-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Cessna Aircraft Company Model 750
Airplanes

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede an existing airworthiness
directive (AD) that applies to all Model 750 airplanes. The existing AD
currently requires inspecting the inboard-hinge brackets of the left
and right elevators for cracking and doing related investigative and
corrective actions if necessary. For certain airplanes, this proposed
AD would require inspecting for cracks and corrosion of the bracket of
the inboard horizontal stabilizer and measuring the lug thickness of
the horizontal stabilizer hinges; doing corrective actions if
necessary; modifying the left and right elevators and left and right
horizontal stabilizer. For all airplanes, this proposed AD would
require replacing the existing elevator assemblies with new elevator
assemblies, which would terminate the requirements of the existing AD.
This proposed AD would also revise the applicability to remove certain
airplanes. This proposed AD results from a report of cracking and
corrosion found on the elevator inboard-hinge brackets and the
horizontal stabilizer hinges. We are issuing this AD to prevent such
cracking and corrosion of the elevator inboard-hinge brackets and the
horizontal stabilizer hinges, which could result in structural failure
of the elevators and consequent loss of control of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by May 24, 2010.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Cessna Aircraft Co., P.O. Box 7706, Wichita, Kansas 67277; telephone
316-517-6215; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet https://www.cessnasupport.com/newlogin.html. You may review
copies of the referenced service information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-
227-1221.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly
after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: T.N. Baktha, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ACE-118W, FAA, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office,
1801 Airport Road, Room 100, Mid-Continent Airport, Wichita, Kansas
67209; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2010-0380;
Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-009-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    On October 26, 2006, we issued AD 2006-23-05, Amendment 39-14817
(71 FR 65047, November 7, 2006), for all The Cessna Aircraft Company
Model 750 airplanes. That AD requires inspecting the inboard-hinge
brackets of the left and right elevators for cracking, and doing
related investigative and corrective actions if necessary. That AD
resulted from a report of cracking found on the elevator inboard-hinge
brackets. We issued that AD to detect and correct cracking of the
elevator inboard-hinge brackets, which could result in structural
failure of the elevators and consequent loss of control of the
airplane.

Actions Since Existing AD Was Issued

    The preamble to AD 2006-23-05 explains that we considered the
requirements ``interim action'' and were considering further rulemaking
if a final action is identified. We now have determined that further
rulemaking is indeed necessary, and this proposed AD follows from that
determination.

Relevant Service Information

    We have reviewed Cessna Service Bulletin SB750-27-62, Revision 3,
dated August 21, 2009, including Service Bulletin Supplemental Data,
Revision D, dated September 18, 2009. That service bulletin describes
procedures for the following:

     For certain airplanes, doing an eddy current inspection
for cracks of the bracket of the inboard horizontal stabilizer; and
corrective action, if necessary, which is replacing any cracked bracket
of the inboard horizontal stabilizer with a serviceable bracket.
     For certain airplanes, measuring the lug thickness of the
horizontal stabilizer hinges; and corrective action, if necessary,
which is replacing the bearing plate with a serviceable bearing plate
if the lug thickness is not within the acceptable tolerance range.
     For certain airplanes, modifying the left and right
horizontal stabilizer, and adding the modification part number of the
horizontal stabilizer to the modification section of the MS27253-1
identification plate.
     For all airplanes, replacing the left and right elevator
assemblies with new elevator assemblies.
    Accomplishment of the applicable actions specified in Cessna
Service Bulletin SB750-27-62, Revision 3, dated August 21, 2009,
eliminates the need for the actions required by AD 2006-23-05.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an
unsafe condition that is likely to develop on other airplanes of the
same type design. For this reason, we are proposing this AD, which
would supersede AD 2006-23-05 and would retain the requirements of the
existing AD. This proposed AD removes certain airplanes from the
applicability of the existing AD. Cessna Model 750 airplanes with
serial number 750-306 and subsequent are no longer subject to the
requirements of this AD as Cessna has incorporated the applicable
requirements in production. This proposed AD would also require
accomplishing the actions specified in the ``Relevant Service
Information'' described previously, except as discussed under
``Differences Between the Proposed AD and Service Bulletin.''

Differences Between the Proposed AD and Service Bulletin

    Cessna Service Bulletin SB750-27-62, Revision 3, dated August 21,
2009, specifies to do eddy current inspection for cracks of the bracket
of the inboard horizontal stabilizer and replace any cracked brackets.
This proposed AD would also require an inspection for corrosion and
replacement of any corroded brackets.

Change to Existing AD

    This proposed AD would retain the requirements of AD 2006-23-05.
Since AD 2006-23-05 was issued, the AD format has been revised, and
certain paragraphs have been rearranged. As a result, the corresponding
paragraph identifiers have changed in this proposed AD, as listed in
the following table:

                      Revised Paragraph Identifiers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Corresponding requirement in this
    Requirement in AD 2006-23-05                 proposed AD
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             paragraph (d)                        paragraph (e)
             paragraph (e)                        paragraph (f)
             paragraph (f)                        paragraph (g)
             paragraph (g)                        paragraph (h)
             paragraph (h)                        paragraph (i)
             paragraph (i)                        paragraph (j)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Costs of Compliance

    The following table provides the estimated costs for U.S. operators
to comply with this proposed AD.

                                                                     Estimated Costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of U.S.-
             Action                  Work hours       Average labor         Parts         Cost per airplane    registered             Fleet cost
                                                      rate per hour                                             airplanes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection (required by AD 2006- 2.................             $85  $0................  $170..............             253  $43,010.
 23-05).
Modification and Replacement     Up to 200.........              85  The manufacturer    Up to $17,000.....             253  Up to 4,301,000.
 (new proposed actions).                                              states that it
                                                                      will supply parts
                                                                      to the operators
                                                                      at no cost.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing Amendment 39-14817 (71 FR
65047, November 7, 2006) and adding the following new AD:

The Cessna Aircraft Company: Docket No. FAA-2010-0380; Directorate
Identifier 2009-NM-009-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by May 24,
2010.

Affected ADs

    (b) This AD supersedes AD 2006-23-05, Amendment 39-14817.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to The Cessna Aircraft Company Model 750
airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified in Cessna
Service Bulletin SB750-27-62, Revision 3, dated August 21, 2009.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 27: Flight
Controls.

Unsafe Condition

    (e) This AD results from a report of cracking and corrosion
found on the elevator inboard-hinge brackets and the horizontal
stabilizer hinges. The Federal Aviation Administration is issuing
this AD to prevent cracking and corrosion of the elevator inboard-
hinge brackets and the horizontal stabilizer hinges, which could
result in structural failure of the elevators and consequent loss of
control of the airplane.

Compliance

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

RESTATEMENT OF REQUIREMENTS OF AD 2006-23-05, WITH NO CHANGES:

Inspection

    (g) After the airplane accumulates 2,500 total flight hours:
Perform a general visual inspection for cracking of the inboard-
hinge brackets of the left and right elevators in accordance with
the Accomplishment Instructions of Cessna Alert Service Letter
ASL750-27-21, dated October 13, 2006. Do the inspection before the
airplane accumulates 3,000 total flight hours, or within 10 flight
hours after November 22, 2006 (the effective date of AD 2006-23-05),
whichever is later.

    Note 1:  For the purposes of this AD, a general visual
inspection is: ``A visual examination of an interior or exterior
area, installation, or assembly to detect obvious damage, failure,
or irregularity. This level of inspection is made from within
touching distance unless otherwise specified. A mirror may be
necessary to enhance visual access to all exposed surfaces in the
inspection area. This level of inspection is made under normally
available lighting conditions such as daylight, hangar lighting,
flashlight, or droplight and may require removal or opening of
access panels or doors. Stands, ladders, or platforms may be
required to gain proximity to the area being checked.''

Related Investigative and Corrective Actions

    (h) If any crack is found during the inspection required by
paragraph (g) of this AD: Before further flight, perform an eddy
current inspection of the inboard-hinge brackets to determine the
crack length, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Cessna Alert Service Letter ASL750-27-21, dated October 13, 2006;
and do the actions specified in paragraph (h)(1) or (h)(2) of this
AD, as applicable, at the time specified. All corrective actions
must be done using a method approved by the Manager, Wichita
Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA. For a replacement method
to be approved by the Manager, Wichita ACO, as required by this
paragraph, the Manager's approval letter must specifically refer to
this AD.
    (1) If the crack is 0.30 inch or more: Replace the bracket
before further flight.
    (2) If the crack is less than 0.30 inch: Continued flight for a
maximum of 10 flight hours for repositioning of the airplane and
replacement of the bracket is allowed, within the restricted flight
envelope included in the attachment to Cessna Alert Service Letter
ASL750-27-21, dated October 13, 2006, titled ``Flight
Restrictions.''

Special Flight Permits

    (i) Special flight permits, as described in Section 39.23 of the
Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 39.23), are allowed with the
limitations required by paragraph (h)(2) of this AD.

No Reporting or Return of Parts to Manufacturer

    (j) Cessna Alert Service Letter ASL750-27-21, dated October 13,
2006, specifies submitting a sheet related to inspection results to
the manufacturer; this AD does not include that requirement. The
service letter also specifies sending the elevator assembly to the
manufacturer for replacement of the inboard-hinge bracket if a crack
is found that is 0.30 inch or more; however, this AD requires
corrective actions be done using a method approved by us.

NEW REQUIREMENTS OF THIS AD:

    (k) Within 60 months after the effective date of this AD, do the
applicable actions required by paragraphs (k)(1), (k)(2), (k)(3),
and (k)(4) of this AD, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Cessna Service Bulletin SB750-27-62, Revision 3,
dated August 21, 2009. Accomplishing the actions required by
paragraph (k) of this AD terminates the requirements of paragraphs
(g) through (j) of this AD.
    (1) For all airplanes except those having S/Ns 288 through 305
inclusive: Do an eddy current inspection for cracks and corrosion of
the bracket of the inboard horizontal stabilizer. Before further
flight, replace any cracked or corroded bracket of the inboard
horizontal stabilizer with a serviceable bracket.
    (2) For all airplanes except those having S/Ns 288 through 305
inclusive: Measure the lug thickness of the horizontal stabilizer
hinges. If the lug thickness is not within the acceptable tolerance
range, as identified in Cessna Service Bulletin SB750-27-62,
Revision 3, dated August 21, 2009, before further flight, replace
the bearing plate with a serviceable bearing plate.
    (3) For all airplanes except those having S/Ns 288 through 305
inclusive: Modify the left and right horizontal stabilizer; and add
the modification part number of the horizontal stabilizer to the
modification section of the MS27253-1 identification plate.
    (4) For all airplanes: Replace the existing elevator assemblies
with new elevator assemblies having part numbers 6734000-17 (for the
left side) and 6734000-18 (for the right side).

Credit for Actions Done Using the Previous Service Information

    (l) Actions accomplished before the effective date of this AD in
accordance with the service bulletins identified in Table 1 of this
AD are considered acceptable for compliance with the corresponding
requirements of paragraph (k) of this AD.

                                 Table 1--Credit for Previous Service Bulletins
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Service Bulletin                       Revision level                       Date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cessna Service Bulletin SB750-27-62..............  Original................  October 13, 2008.
Cessna Service Bulletin SB750-27-62..............  1.......................  October 22, 2008.
Cessna Service Bulletin SB750-27-62..............  2.......................  December 17, 2008.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (m)(1) The Manager, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to
ATTN: T.N. Baktha, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ACE-118W,
FAA, Wichita ACO, 1801 Airport Road, Room 100, Mid-Continent
Airport, Wichita, Kansas 67209; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax (316)
946-4107.
    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or
principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a
principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office.
The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 1, 2010.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-7943 Filed 4-7-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


Comment Info: =================

General Comment:Dear Mr. Zeller:

I am writing as an individual consumer to request an extension of the comment period for the Food and Drug Administration's ("FDA") Proposed Rule Deeming Tobacco Products to be Subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as amended by the Family Smoking and Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (the "Proposed Rule") published at 79 Fed. Reg. 23,142 and Federal Register No. 2014-09491. On behalf of myself, I am requesting that the comment period for the Proposed Rule be extended by the FDA for an additional 105 days, from its current 75-day period, to 180 days.

The Proposed Rule raises a number of significant issues and questions that are important and relevant to me, as a consumer of products that are proposed for regulation under the Proposed Rule. The Proposed Rule asks about a hundred different questions I might want to respond to. I want to provide my thoughts and comments on many of these issues, but my time to devote to researching and providing thoughtful comments on these important questions is limited. I have already spent many hours researching and dissecting these issues, but they take time. I know that the FDA took many years to even come up with the Proposed Rule, so I do not think it is at all unreasonable to allow the public a mere six months to comment on it. This is our only opportunity, as consumers, to provide our feedback.

I feel very strongly about e-cigarettes as an alternative to combustible cigarettes. Quite simply, I firmly believe that they saved my life. I have been using e-cigarettes for a year now and not once thought of going back to traditional cigarettes. I am a 27 year old female, smoked for 13 years. I have never felt healthier in my life.  I wish to provide you with my personal story, as well as science- and evidence-based responses to your questions so that you can take my comment into account. I realize that the FDA has the authority under 21 CFR 10.40 to extend this time frame and that the FDA has exercised this authority on numerous occasions in the past. I would therefore ask that you do so here, so that all stakeholders have the opportunity to provide their comments on this proposed regulation.

I appreciate your consideration of my request and am happy to discuss this issue with you further.

Tara Kluver.


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 248 (Thursday, December 28, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 89684-89685]
[FR Doc No: 2023-28699]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER24-705-000]

Bazinga, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate
Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Bazinga, LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with an
accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a
request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is January 10, 2024.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically may mail similar pleadings to
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in docketed
proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225
Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov). From
the Commission's Home Page on the internet, this information is
available on eLibrary. The full text of this document is available on
eLibrary in PDF and Microsoft Word format for viewing, printing, and/or
downloading. To access this document in eLibrary, type the docket
number excluding the last three digits of this document in the docket
number field.
    User assistance is available for eLibrary and the Commission's
website during normal business hours from FERC Online Support at 202-
502-6652 (toll free at 1-866-208-3676) or email at
[email protected], or the Public Reference Room at (202) 502-
8371, TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>. Email the Public Reference Room at
[email protected].
    The Commission's Office of Public Participation (OPP) supports
meaningful public engagement and participation in Commission
proceedings. OPP can help members of the public, including landowners,
environmental justice communities, Tribal members and others, access
publicly available information and navigate Commission processes. For
public inquiries and assistance with making filings such as
interventions, comments, or requests for rehearing, the public is
encouraged to contact OPP at<PHONE_NUMBER> or [email protected].

    Dated: December 21, 2023.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-28699 Filed 12-27-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 3 (Thursday, January 5, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1334-1335]
[FR Doc No: 2016-32021]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL17-30-000]

Nogales Transmission, L.L.C., Nogales Frontier Operations,
L.L.C.; Notice of Petition for Declaratory Order

    Take notice that on December 21, 2016, pursuant to Rule 207(a)(2)
of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of
Practice and Procedure,\1\ Nogales Transmission, L.L.C. (Nogales
Transmission) and Nogales Frontier Operations, L.L.C. (Nogales
Operations) filed a petition for declaratory order: (1) Finding that
Nogales Transmission is a passive entity and therefore not a ``public
utility'' under the Federal Power Act, or an ``electric utility
company'' under the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 2005; (2)
granting Nogales Operations negotiated rate authority; (3) approving
Nogales Operations' capacity allocation methodology; and (4) granting
certain waivers of Commission regulations, all as more fully explained
in the petition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 18 CFR 385.207(a)(2) (2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in this proceeding
must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or
before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests
will be considered by the

Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will
not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person
wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion
to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must
be filed on or before the comment date. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Petitioner.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceeding are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on January 20, 2017.

    Dated: December 28, 2016.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-32021 Filed 1-4-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P