[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 179 (Friday, September 14, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56832-56833]
[FR Doc No: 2012-22684]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 2

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

    Docket Numbers: ER11-1850-002; ER11-1847-002; ER11-1846-002; ER11-
2509-004; ER11-1848-002; ER11-2598-005; ER11-2516-003.
    Applicants: Direct Energy Services, LLC, Direct Energy Marketing
Inc., Gateway Energy Services Corporation, Direct Energy Business, LLC,
Energetix, Inc., NYSEG Solutions, Inc., Energy America, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Change in Status of Direct Energy Business,
LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 8/30/12.
    Accession Number: 20120830-5064.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/20/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-1914-001.
    Applicants: ISO New England Inc.
    Description: Compliance with Order in Docket No. ER12-1914-000 to
be effective 8/1/2012.
    Filed Date: 8/30/12.
    Accession Number: 20120830-5048.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/20/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-2161-001.
    Applicants: Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC.
    Description: Compliance Filing in Dkt. No. ER12-2161 to be
effective 7/2/2012.
    Filed Date: 8/30/12.
    Accession Number: 20120830-5087.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/20/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-2185-001.
    Applicants: Wisconsin Electric Power Company.
    Description: Rate Schedule FERC No. 90 revisions compliance filing
to be effective 9/1/2012.
    Filed Date: 8/30/12.
    Accession Number: 20120830-5088.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/20/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-2548-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Amendment to WDAT Service Agreement with SCE-RAP for
CREST to be effective 8/1/2012.
    Filed Date: 8/30/12.

    Accession Number: 20120830-5067.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/20/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-2549-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: SGIA and Service Agreement SCE-Samsung C&T America,
Commercial Solar RTS 3 Proj. to be effective 10/30/2012.
    Filed Date: 8/30/12.
    Accession Number: 20120830-5068.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/20/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-2550-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Original Service Agreement No. 3389; Queue No. X3-081
to be effective 8/3/2012.
    Filed Date: 8/30/12.
    Accession Number: 20120830-5097.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/20/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-2551-000.
    Applicants: ITC Midwest LLC.
    Description: Filing of Joint Use Agreement to be effective 10/29/
2012.
    Filed Date: 8/30/12.
    Accession Number: 20120830-5106.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/20/12.

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

    Dated: August 30, 2012.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-22684 Filed 9-13-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 87 (Monday, May 6, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26413-26416]
[FR Doc No: 2013-10605]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-69480; File No. SR-OCC-2013-04]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Options Clearing Corporation;
Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change to Change the Expiration Date
For Most Option Contracts to the Third Friday of the Expiration Month
Instead of the Saturday Following the Third Friday

April 30, 2013.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Exchange Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby
given that on April 17, 2013 The Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items
have been substantially prepared by the clearing agency.\3\ The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ OCC also filed the proposed rule change as an advance notice
under Section 806(e)(1) of Title VIII of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street
Reform and Consumer Protection Act (``Dodd-Frank Act'') entitled the
Payment, Clearing, and Settlement Supervision Act of 2010
(``Clearing Supervision Act''). 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1); SR-OCC-2013-
802.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the
Proposed Rule Change

    This proposed rule change would allow OCC to change the expiration
date for most option contracts to the third Friday of the expiration
month instead of the Saturday following the third Friday.

II. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the clearing agency included
statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule
change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule
change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places
specified in Item IV below. The clearing agency has prepared summaries,
set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant
aspects of such statements.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Commission has modified the text of the summaries
prepared by the clearing agency.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(A) Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

    Most option contracts (``Standard Expiration Contracts'') currently
expire at the ``expiration time'' (11:59 p.m. Eastern Time) on the
Saturday following the third Friday of the specified expiration month
(``Expiration Date'').\5\ The purpose of this proposed rule change is
to change the Expiration Date for Standard Expiration Contracts to the
third Friday of the expiration month. (The expiration time would
continue to be 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the Expiration Date.) The
proposed change would apply only to Standard Expiration Contracts
expiring after February 1, 2015, and OCC does not propose to change the
Expiration Date for any outstanding option contract. The proposed
change will apply only to series of option contracts opened for trading
after the effective date of this proposed rule change and having
Expiration Dates later than February 1, 2015. Option contracts having
non-standard expiration dates (``Non-standard Expiration Contracts'')
will be unaffected by this proposed rule change.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See the definition of ``expiration time'' in Article I of
OCC's By-Laws.
    \6\ Examples of options with Non-standard Expiration Contracts
include flex options, quarterly, monthly and weekly options, where
the expiration exercise processing for such options presently occurs
on a weekday.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In order to provide a smooth transition to the Friday expiration,
OCC would, beginning June 21, 2013, move the expiration exercise
procedures to Friday for all Standard Expiration Contracts even though
the contracts would continue to expire on Saturday. After February 1,
2015, virtually all Standard Expiration Contracts will actually expire
on Friday. The only Standard Expiration Contracts that will expire on a
Saturday after February 1, 2015 are certain options that were listed
prior to the effectiveness of this rule change, and a limited number of
options that may be listed prior to necessary systems changes of the
options exchanges, which are expected to be completed in August 2013.
The exchanges have agreed that once these systems changes are made they
will not open for trading any new series of option contracts with
Saturday expiration dates falling after February 1, 2015.
Background
    Saturday was established as the standard Expiration Date for OCC-
cleared options primarily in order to allow sufficient time for
processing of

option exercises, including correction of errors, while the markets
were closed and positions remained fixed. However, improvements in
technology and a great deal of experience have rendered Saturday
expiration processing inefficient, and Saturday processing also poses
unnecessary operational risk upon OCC and its clearing members.
Therefore, it has been a long-term goal of OCC and its clearing members
to move the expiration process for all options with Standard Expiration
Contracts from Saturday to Friday night.
    Eliminating Saturday expirations will allow OCC to streamline the
expiration process between Standard Expiration Contracts and Non-
standard Expiration Contracts, which will increase operational
efficiencies and reduce operational risk for OCC and its clearing
members. After the expiration date for Standard Expiration Contracts is
moved to Friday night, expiration processing for standard options,
quarterly options, and weekly options will all occur on the same day
and will be a single, and inherently more efficient, operational
process. The move to Friday night processing will also align expiration
processing schedules for United States markets with expiration
processing schedules for European markets and will allow affected
clearing members to run a single, consistent, and efficient operational
process for all U.S. equity/index options regardless of where such
options are exercised. Moreover, the move to Friday night processing
will also eliminate the operational risk presented by scheduling an
expiration process to run on one Saturday per month when it is
otherwise run weekly on Friday night. Saturdays are typically reserved
for system maintenance and installs of system enhancements so Saturday
expiration processes force such maintenance and installs to be
rescheduled and sometimes delayed.
    From a risk management perspective, the proposed rule change will
compress the operational timeframe for processing option expirations
such that clearing members will be required to reconcile options trades
on trade date. Trade date reconciliation is a better risk management
practice and will facilitate and promote the use of intra-day risk
management systems by clearing members as well as move clearing members
toward adopting real-time trade date reconciliation and position
balancing systems.
    Industry groups, clearing members, and options exchanges have been
active participants in planning for the transition to the Friday
expiration. In March, 2012, OCC began to discuss moving Standard
Expiration Contracts to Friday expiration dates with industry groups,
including two Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association
(``SIFMA'') committees, the Operations and Technology Steering
Committee and the Options Committee, and at two major industry
conferences, the SIFMA Operations Conference and the Options Industry
Conference. OCC also discussed the project with the Intermarket
Surveillance Group and at an OCC Operations Roundtable. In each case,
OCC received broad support for the initiative. Also, OCC surveyed all
of its clearing members as well as its service bureaus and learned that
a significant majority of those surveyed are currently ready to move to
Friday night expiration processing. OCC has worked with the other
clearing members and service bureaus so that all affected parties
experience a smooth transition to Friday night expiration processing.
OCC has obtained assurances from all options industry participants that
they will be ready to move to Friday night expiration processing by
June 2013.
    Friday night expiration processing is also consistent with the
long-standing rules and procedures of the options exchanges and the
Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (``FINRA''),\7\ which generally
provide that exercise decisions with respect to Standard Expiration
Contracts must be made by, and exercise instructions may not be
accepted from customers after, 5:30 p.m. Eastern Time on the business
day preceding expiration (usually Friday).\8\ Brokerage firms may set
earlier cutoff times for customers submitting exercise notices.
Clearing members are permitted to submit exercise instructions after
the cutoff time (``Supplementary Exercises'') only in case of errors or
other unusual situations, and may be subject to fines or disciplinary
actions.\9\ OCC believes that the extended period between cutoff time
and expiration of options is no longer necessary given modern
technology.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ OCC has contacted FINRA regarding the need to review the
Contrary Exercise Advisory Rule to ensure such rule is consistent
with the industry effort to move to Friday expiration dates. FINRA
has determined that no changes to its current rules are needed in
order to accommodate the transition of expiration processing from
Saturday to Friday night. FINRA has agreed that it will work with
the industry to implement coordinated and appropriate modifications
to its rules in order to accommodate Friday night expiration dates,
which will begin on or after February 1, 2015.
    \8\ See, e.g., FINRA Rule 4210(b)(23)(A)(iii). ``Option holders
have until 5:30 p.m. Eastern Time (``ET'') on the business day
immediately prior to the expiration date to make a final exercise
decision to exercise or not exercise an expiring option. Members may
not accept exercise instructions for customer or noncustomer
accounts after 5:30 p.m. ET.'' Member firms may specify earlier
cutoff times.
    \9\ See OCC Rule 805(g).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Transition Period
    Based on significant dialogue between OCC and clearing members
regarding the move to Friday expiration, OCC believes that the adoption
of Friday expiration for Standard Expiration Contracts is best
accomplished through an appropriate transition period during which
processing activity for all options, whether expiring on Friday or
Saturday, would move to Friday, followed by a change in the expiration
day for new series of options. In May 2012, OCC and its clearing
members determined that Friday, June 21, 2013, would be an appropriate
date on which to move expiration processing from Saturday to Friday
night. Accordingly, OCC proposes that, beginning June 21, 2013, Friday
expiration processing will be in effect for all expiring Standard
Expiration Contracts, regardless of whether the contract's actual
expiration date is Friday or Saturday. However, for contracts having a
Saturday expiration date, exercise requests received after Friday
expiration processing is complete but before the Saturday contract
expiration time will continue to be processed so long as they are
submitted in accordance with OCC's procedures governing such requests.
After the transition period and the expiration of all existing
Saturday-expiring options, expiration processing will be a single
operational process and will run on Friday night for all Standard
Expiration Contracts.
Friday Expiration Processing Schedule
    Currently, expiration processing for Standard Expiration Contracts
begins on Saturday morning at 6:00 a.m. Central Time and is completed
at approximately noon Central Time when margin and settlement reports
are available. The window for submission of instructions in accordance
with OCC's exercise-by-exception procedures under Rule 805(d) is open
from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. Central Time on Saturday morning.\10\ OCC
proposes that the window for submission of exercise-by-exception
instructions be open from 6:00 p.m. to 9:15 p.m. Central Time on Friday
evening.\11\ Friday expiration processing

for Standard Expiration Contracts would therefore begin at 6:00 p.m.
Central Time on Friday evening and end at approximately 2:00 a.m.
Central Time on Saturday morning when margin and settlement reports
will be available.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ OCC's exercise-by-exception procedures are described in
Rule 805(d), which generally provides that each clearing member will
automatically be deemed to have submitted an exercise notice
immediately prior to the expiration time for all in-the-money option
contracts unless the clearing member has instructed OCC otherwise in
a written exercise notice.
    \11\ The exercise-by-exception window for weekly and quarterly
expiration options is from 6:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. Central Time on
the expiration date.
    \12\ The proposed expiration schedule for Friday expiration
processing is similar to the expiration schedule for weekly options,
which begins at 6:00 p.m. Central Time on Friday evening and ends at
11:30 p.m. Central Time on Friday evening. All timeframes would be
set forth in OCC's procedures and subject to change based on OCC's
experience with Friday expiration processing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Exercises for Standard Expiration Contracts with Saturday
expirations must be allowed under the terms of the contracts. However,
in order to accommodate the proposed new expiration schedule, OCC also
proposes to shorten the period of time in which clearing members may
submit a Supplementary Exercise notice under Rule 805(b). In addition,
Rule 801 would be amended to eliminate the ability of clearing members
to revoke or modify exercise notices submitted to OCC. This proposed
change, along with the proposed change in the processing timeline
discussed above, will more closely align OCC's expiration processing
procedures with exchange rules, under which exchange members must
submit exercise instructions by 5:30 p.m. Central Time on Friday and
may not accept exercise instructions from customers after 4:30 p.m.
Central Time on Friday. Accordingly, this proposed change will not
represent a departure from current practices for clearing members or
their customers.
    In connection with moving from Saturday to Friday night processing
and expiration, OCC reviewed other aspects of its business to confirm
that there would be no unintended consequences, and concluded that
there would be none. For example, OCC believes the proposed changes do
not affect OCC's liquidity forecasting procedures, nor do they impact
OCC's liquidity needs, since OCC's liquidity forecasts and liquidity
needs are driven by settlement obligations, which occur on the same day
(T+3) irrespective of the move to Friday night processing and
expiration dates.
Grandfathering of Certain Options Series
    Certain option contracts have already been listed on exchanges with
expiration dates as distant as December 2016. Such options have
Saturday expiration dates and OCC cannot change the terms of existing
option contracts. In addition, clearing members have expressed a clear
preference to not have open interest in any particular month with
different expiration dates. Therefore, OCC will designate certain
expiration dates as ``grandfathered,'' and any option contract that is
listed, or may be listed in the future, that expires on a grandfathered
date will have a Saturday expiration date even if such expiration date
is after February 1, 2015.\13\ Further, certain FLEX options that have
already been accepted for clearance and have expiration dates beyond
February 1, 2015, will also be designated as grandfathered. The Friday
night expiration transition period processing schedule, as described
above, will be in effect for any grandfathered Saturday expiration
contract. In order to minimize the number of grandfathered expiration
dates, exchanges have already agreed that, if there is not already a
previously listed Standard Expiration Contract with an expiration in a
particular month that is after February 1, 2015,\14\ they will not open
for trading any new series of Standard Expiration Contracts with
Saturday expiration dates in such month.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ After OCC designates an expiration date as grandfathered,
the exchanges have agreed to not permit the listing of, and OCC will
not accept for clearance, any newly listed standard expiration
option contract with a Friday expiration in the applicable month.
    \14\ Until exchanges complete certain systems enhancements in
August 2013, it is possible that additional option contracts may be
listed with Saturday expiration dates beyond February 1, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Amendments to By-Laws and Rules
    In order to implement the change to Friday expiration processing
and eventual transition to Friday expiration for all Standard
Expiration Contracts, OCC proposes to amend the definition of
``expiration date'' in Article I and certain other articles of the By-
Laws. As amended, the applicability of the definition would not be
limited to stock options, and the definition of ``expiration date'' in
certain articles of the By-Laws therefore can be deleted in reliance on
the Article I definition. OCC also proposes to amend Rule 805, and all
rules supplementing or replacing Rule 805, to allow for Friday
expiration processing during the transition to Friday expiration.
Section 18 of Article VI of the By-Laws would also be amended to align
procedures for delays in producing Expiration Exercise Reports and
submission of exercise instructions with the amended expiration
exercise procedures in Rule 805. Rule 801 would be amended to modify
the prohibition against exercising an American-style option contract on
the business day prior to its expiration date because this prohibition
is necessary only for options expiring on a Saturday. The prohibition
can be removed altogether when there are no longer any options expiring
on a Saturday.
    Rule 801 is also being amended to remove clearing members' ability
to revoke or modify exercise notices in order to accommodate the
proposed compressed Friday expiration processing expiration schedule.
Finally, Rules 801 and 805 would be amended to allow certain
determinations to be made by high-level officers of OCC, rather than
the Board of Directors, in order to provide OCC with greater
operational flexibility in processing exercise requests received after
Friday expiration processing is complete but before the Saturday
contract expiration time, and to replace various references to the
expiration date of options with reference to the procedures of Rule
805.
    Under the proposed rule change, OCC would preserve the ability of
the options exchanges to designate (or, in the case of flexibly
structured options, permit clearing members to designate) non-standard
expiration dates for options, or classes or series of options, so long
as the designated expiration date is not a date OCC has specified as
ineligible to be an expiration date.
    OCC believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
purposes and requirements of Section 17A of the Exchange Act \15\
because it provides for the prompt and accurate clearance and
settlement of securities transactions and the protection of securities
investors and the public interest \16\ by improving the processing time
for clearing of option contracts, standardizing the expiration day of
numerous options contracts, and requiring clearing members to reconcile
options transactions on the trade date, which will facilitate and
promote intra-day risk management by the clearing members. OCC believes
the proposed rule change is not inconsistent with any existing OCC By-
Laws or Rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. Section 78q-1.
    \16\ 15 U.S.C. Section 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(B) Clearing Agency's Statement on Burden on Competition

    OCC does not believe that the proposed rule change would impose a
burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed rule change, which
will apply to all OCC clearing members, involves operational
improvements that will allow OCC and its clearing members to become
more operationally efficient and

reduce operational risk. Moreover, OCC has coordinated moving to a
Friday night expiration process with options industry participants and
has also obtained assurance from all such participants that they are
able to adhere to OCC's Friday night expiration implementation
schedule. Therefore, OCC does not believe the proposed rule change
would impose a burden on competition.

(C) Clearing Agency's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change
Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    While the matters discussed in this proposed rule change have been
subject to extensive discussion with clearing members, including during
an OCC Operations Roundtable, written comments were not and are not
intended to be solicited with respect to the proposed rule change, and
none have been received.

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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period up to 90 days (i) as the
Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be
appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve or disapprove such proposed rule change, or
    (B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.
    The proposal shall not take effect until all regulatory actions
required with respect to the proposal are completed.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ OCC also filed the proposed rule change as an advance
notice under Section 806(e)(1) of the Clearing Supervision Act. 12
U.S.C. 5465(e)(1); SR-OCC-2013-802. Proposed changes filed under the
Clearing Supervision Act may be implemented pursuant to Section
806(e)(1)(G) of the Clearing Supervision Act if the Commission does
not object to the proposed change within 60 days of the later of (i)
the date that the proposed change was filed with the Commission or
(ii) the date that any additional information requested by the
Commission is received. 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1)(G).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-OCC-2013-04 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-OCC-2013-04. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of OCC and on OCC's
Web site: (http://www.optionsclearing.com/components/docs/legal/rules_and_bylaws/sr_occ_13_04.pdf). All comments received will be posted
without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to
File Number SR-OCC-2013-04 and should be submitted on or before May 28,
2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\18\
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-10605 Filed 5-3-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 64 (Wednesday, April 5, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 16510]
[FR Doc No: 2017-06696]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2015-0854]

Special Local Regulations and Safety Zones; Recurring Marine
Events and Fireworks Displays Within the Fifth Coast Guard District

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of enforcement of regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce a safety zone for the National
Cherry Blossom Festival fireworks display taking place over the
Washington Channel, Washington, DC, on April 15, 2017. The safety zone
will include all waters within a 100 yard radius of the fireworks barge
in approximate position latitude 38[deg]52'43.67'' N., longitude
077[deg]01'28.39'' W. This date and location is a change to those
listed for the annually scheduled event, as indicated in U.S. Coast
Guard regulations, because the event sponsor changed the scheduled date
and location of this annual fireworks display. During the enforcement
period, vessels may not enter, remain in, or transit through the safety
zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port or designated Coast
Guard patrol personnel on scene. This action is necessary to ensure
safety of life on navigable waters during the event.

DATES: The regulations in 33 CFR 165.506, listed as event (b.) 1,
Washington Channel, Upper Potomac River, Washington, DC; Safety Zone,
in the table to 33 CFR 165.506 will be enforced from 7:30 p.m. to 9:30
p.m. on April 15, 2017; and in the case of inclement weather
enforcement will be from 7:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. on April 16, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
notice of enforcement, call or email Mr. Ron Houck, U.S. Coast Guard
Sector Maryland-National Capital Region (WWM Division); telephone 410-
576-2674, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On February 22, 2017, and March 8, 2017, the
Coast Guard was notified by the National Cherry Blossom Festival
firework display sponsor that a change of date and location was
necessary to those previously listed for the annually scheduled event,
as indicated in 33 CFR 165.506. The location of the annual fireworks
display is changed to approximately 550 yards upstream and its size is
reduced, to include all waters of the Washington Channel within 100
yards radius of the fireworks barge in approximate position latitude
38[deg]52'43.67'' N., longitude 077[deg]01'28.39'' W., located in
Washington, DC. The Coast Guard will enforce the safety zone in 33 CFR
165.506 from 7:30 p.m. until 9:30 p.m. on April 15, 2017, for the
National Cherry Blossom Festival fireworks display. This action is
being taken to provide for the safety of life on navigable waterways
during this event. Our regulation for Recurring Marine Events and
Fireworks Displays within the Fifth Coast Guard District, Sec.
165.506, specifies the location of the regulated area for this safety
zone as a circular shaped area that includes all waters of the Upper
Potomac River, within 170 yard radius of the fireworks barge in
approximate position latitude 38[deg]52'20.3'' N., longitude
077[deg]01'17.5'' W., located within the Washington Channel, at
Washington Harbor, DC. As specified in Sec.  165.506(d), during the
enforcement period, vessels may not enter, remain in, or transit
through the safety zone unless authorized by the Coast Guard Captain of
the Port (COTP) or designated Coast Guard patrol personnel on scene.
All persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of the COTP,
Coast Guard Patrol Commander or the designated on-scene-patrol
personnel. Other Federal, State and local agencies may assist these
personnel in the enforcement of the safety zone. If the COTP or his
designated on-scene patrol personnel determines the regulated area need
not be enforced for the full duration stated in this notice, a
Broadcast Notice to Mariners may be used to grant general permission to
enter the regulated area.
    This notice of enforcement is issued under authority of 33 CFR
165.506(d) and 5 U.S.C. 552(a). In addition to this notice of
enforcement in the Federal Register, the Coast Guard will provide
notification of this enforcement period via the Local Notice to
Mariners and marine information broadcasts.

    Dated: March 30, 2017.
Lonnie P. Harrison, Jr.,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Maryland-National
Capital Region.
[FR Doc. 2017-06696 Filed 4-4-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


  MacroButton macIb01 i

EPA REGISTRATION DIVISION COMPANY NOTICE OF FILING FOR PESTICIDE
PETITIONS PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER

EPA Registration Division contact: [Shaja Joyner, Product Manager 20,
703-308-3194]

TEMPLATE:

BASF

[Insert petition number]

	EPA has received a pesticide petition ([insert petition number]) from
BASF Corporation, 26 Davis Drive, P.O. Box 13528, Research Triangle
Park, NC 27709 requesting, pursuant to section 408(d) of the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d), to amend 40 CFR
part 180 by increasing an established tolerance for residues of
boscalid,
3-pyridinecarboxamide,2-chloro-N-(4'-chloro[1,1'-biphenyl]-2-yl) in or
on the raw commodity Vegetable, legume, edible-podded, subgroup 6A to 5
parts per million (ppm).  EPA has determined that the petition contains
data or information regarding the elements set forth in section 408
(d)(2) of  FDDCA; however, EPA has not fully evaluated the sufficiency
of the submitted data at this time or whether the data supports granting
of the petition. Additional data may be needed before EPA rules on the
petition.

A. Residue Chemistry

	1. Plant metabolism. Nature of the residue studies (OPPTS Harmonized
Guideline 860.1300) were conducted in grapes, lettuce and beans as
representative crops in order to characterize the fate of boscalid (BAS
510 F) in all crop matrices.  In all three crops the boscalid (BAS 510
F) Residues of Concern (ROC) were characterized as parent boscalid (BAS
510 F).  A confined rotational crop study also determined that parent
was the residue of concern in the representative crops of radish,
lettuce and wheat.

	2. Analytical method. In plants, the parent residue is extracted using
an aqueous organic solvent mixture followed by liquid/liquid
partitioning and a column clean up.  Quantitation is by gas
chromatography using mass spectrometry (GC/MS).  In livestock the
residues are extracted with methanol.  The extract is treated with
enzymes in order to release the conjugated glucuronic acid metabolite.
The residues are then isolated by liquid/liquid partition followed by
column chromatography. The hydroxylated metabolite is acetylated
followed by a column clean-up.  The parent and acetylated metabolite are
quantitated by gas chromatography with electron capture detection.

	3. Magnitude of residues. Field trials were carried out in order to
determine the magnitude of the residue of boscalid (BAS 510 F) in dry
and succulent beans and peas to satisfy the requirements for a tolerance
of boscalid in Legume Vegetables (Succulent or Dried), Crop Group 6.
The number and locations of field trials are in accordance with OPPTS
Guideline 860.1500.  Field trials were carried out using the maximum use
rate, the maximum number of applications, and the minimum pre-harvest
interval.  This action proposes increasing the tolerance for boscalid
residues in or on Edible-podded legume vegetables, Crop Subgroup 6A from
1.6 ppm to 5.0 ppm under the Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) proposed
pilot program for US Import Tolerances.

B. Toxicological Profile

	1. Acute toxicity.  Based on available acute toxicity data, boscalid
and its formulated products do not pose acute toxicity risks.  The acute
toxicity studies place technical boscalid (BAS 510 F) in toxicity
category IV for acute oral; category III for acute dermal and category
IV for acute inhalation.  Boscalid is category IV for both eye and skin
irritation and it is not a dermal sensitizer. For Edible-podded legume
vegetables, Crop Subgroup 6A, the product proposed is Endura® fungicide
(BAS 510 02/04 F) containing boscalid (BAS 510 F) as the active
ingredient.  Endura® fungicide (BAS 510 02/04 F) has an acute oral
toxicity category of III, acute dermal of category III, acute inhalation
of category IV, eye irritation of category III, skin irritation of
category IV, and is not a dermal sensitizer. An acute neurotoxicity
study in rats was conducted up to 2000 mg/kg bw/day with no evidence of
neurotoxicity.

	2. Genotoxicity. Ames Test (1 Study; gene point mutation): Negative; In
Vitro CHO/HGPRT Locus Mammalian Cell Mutation Assay (1 Study; point gene
mutation): Negative; In Vitro V79 Cell Cytogenetic Assay (1 Study;
Chromosome Damage): Negative; In Vivo Mouse Micronucleus (1 Study;
Chromosome Damage): Negative; In Vitro Rat Hepatocyte (1 Study; DNA
damage and repair): Negative. Boscalid has been tested in a total of 5
genetic toxicology assays consisting of in vitro and in vivo studies.
It can be stated that boscalid did not show any mutagenic, clastogenic
or other genotoxic activity when tested under the conditions of the
studies mentioned above.  Therefore, boscalid does not pose a genotoxic
hazard to humans.

	3. Reproductive and developmental toxicity. The potential reproductive
and developmental toxicity of boscalid was investigated in a
two-generation rat reproduction study as well as in rat and rabbit
teratology studies.  There were no adverse effects on reproduction in
the two-generation study at any dose tested.  The reproductive NOAEL is
10,000 ppm (1165 and 1181 for males and females, respectively), the
highest dose tested.  Toxicity to the offspring was seen at 1,000 ppm in
the form of decreased pup weights in the F2 males, and at 10,000 ppm in
the form of decreased pup weights for both males and females of both the
F1 and F2 generations.  The offspring NOAEL is 100 and 1000 ppm (11 and
116 mg/kg b.w./day) for males and females, respectively. In males of the
F1 generation, reduced body weight and reduced body weight gain were
observed at 10,000 ppm. Additionally, hepatocyte degeneration was
observed in male animals of both the F0 and F1 generations at 10,000
ppm.  The parental systemic NOAEL is 1000 and 10,000 (113 and 1181 mg/kg
b.w./day) for males and females, respectively.

No teratogenic effects were noted in either the rat or rabbit
developmental studies. In the rat study, evidence of maternal or
developmental toxicity was not observed at any dose (highest dose tested
of 1,000 mg/kg b.w./day).  In the rabbit teratology study, at the high
dose of 1,000 mg/kg b.w./day, a maternal body weight gain decrease
compared to controls of 81% was observed during the treatment period.
Reduced food consumption, reduced body weight and abortions in three
dams, were also seen at 1,000 mg/kg b.w./day.  The NOAEL for both
maternal and developmental toxicity was determined to be 300 mg/kg
b.w/day.

Neurotoxicity was not observed at any dose in the developmental
neurotoxicity study.  Reduced pup body weights were observed at the high
and mid dose levels of 1000 and 10,000 ppm (118 and 1,183 mg/kg
b.w./day, respectively).  No developmental toxicity was seen at the low
dose of 14 mg/kg b.w./day (100 ppm).  Although no maternal toxicity was
seen in this study, other studies which evaluated more parameters at
similar doses of boscalid demonstrated maternal toxicity.

The Agency concluded that there are no residual uncertainties for pre-
and postnatal toxicity as the degree of concern is low for the
susceptibility seen in the above studies, and the dose and endpoints
selected for the overall risk assessments will address the concerns for
the body weight effects seen in the offspring.  Although the dose
selected for overall risk assessments (21.8 mg/kg b.w./day) is higher
than the NOAEL's in the 2-generation reproduction study (11 mg/kg
b.w./day) and the developmental neurotoxicity study (14 mg/kg b.w./day),
this difference is considered to be an artifact of the dose selection
process in these studies.  For example, there is a 10-fold difference
between the LOAEL (113 mg/kg b.w./day) and the NOAEL (11 mg/kg b.w./day)
in the two generation reproduction study. A similar pattern was seen
with regard to the developmental neurotoxicity study, where there is
also a 10-fold difference between the LOAEL (147 mg/kg b.w./day) and the
NOAEL (14 mg/kg b.w./day).  There is only a 2-3-fold difference between
the LOAEL (57 mg/kg b.w./day) and the NOAEL (21.8 mg/kg b.w./day) in the
critical chronic dog study which was used for risk assessment.  Because
the gap between the NOAEL and LOAEL in the 2-generation reproduction and
developmental neurotoxicity studies was large and the effects at the
LOAEL's were minimal, the true no-observed-adverse-effect-level was
probably considerably higher. Therefore, the selection of the NOAEL of
21.8 mg/kg b.w./day from the 1-year dog study is conservative and
appropriate for the overall risk assessments.  In addition, the
endpoints for risk assessment are based on thyroid effects seen in
multiple species (mice, rats and dogs) and after various exposure
durations (subchronic and chronic exposures) which were not observed at
the LOAEL's in either the 2-generation reproduction or the developmental
neurotoxicity studies.  Based on these data, the Agency concluded that
there are no residual uncertainties for pre- and post-natal toxicity.

	4. Subchronic toxicity. The subchronic toxicity of boscalid was
investigated in 90–day feeding studies with rats, mice and dogs, and
in a 28–day dermal administration study in rats.  Additionally a
90–day neurotoxicity study in rats was performed.  Generally, mild
toxicity was observed including alterations in various clinical
chemistry parameters and effects on the liver and thyroid.  In the rat,
effects observed were increased thyroid weight and increased incidence
of thyroid hyperplasia as well as follicular epithelial hypertrophy.
Increased liver weights and an increased incidence of marked fatty
changes in the liver were observed in mice. Changes observed in dogs
were increased serum alkaline phosphatase and liver weights.  The lowest
subchronic toxicity NOAEL was from the dog study (7.6/8.1 mg/kg b.w./day
in males and females, respectively).

No evidence of immunotoxicity was observed in a 28-day immunotoxicity
study in rats.

In the 28–day repeat dose dermal study, no systemic effects were noted
up to the highest dose tested of 1,000 mg/kg b.w./day.

In a 90–day rat neurotoxicity study, no signs of neurotoxicity were
observed in the pups or adults.  The NOAEL is the highest tested of
15,000 ppm (1,050/1,272 mg/kg b.w./day in males and females,
respectively).

	5. Chronic toxicity. The chronic toxicity/oncogenicity studies with
boscalid include a 12–month feeding study with Beagle dogs, an
18–month B63CF1 mouse feeding study, a 24–month Wistar rat chronic
feeding study and a 24–month Wistar rat oncogenicity study. At the
highest dose tested in dogs, effects observed consisted primarily of
increased liver and thyroid weights and some serum clinical chemistry
changes.  The NOAEL was 800 ppm (21.8 mg/kg b.w./day males; 22.1 mg/kg
b.w./day females).

In the mouse oncogenicity study, decreased body weights were seen in
both males and females at 8000 ppm (1345 and 1804 mg/kg b.w./day for
males and females, respectively) and in males at 2000 ppm (331 mg/kg
b.w./day).  Also in males at 8000 ppm, increased liver weights and an
increased incidence of peripherial hypertrophy of the liver were
observed.  The NOAEL was 400 ppm and 2000 ppm (65 and 443 mg/kg
b.w./day) for male and female mice, respectively.

In both the rat chronic and oncogenicity studies, the highest dose
tested of 15,000 ppm exceeded a maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and was
discontinued after 17 months.  Effects observed at the next highest dose
of 2,500 ppm (110/ 150 mg/kg b.w./day for males and females,
respectively) were increased thyroid weights and histopathological
changes in the thyroid which included follicular cell hypertrophy,
hyperplasia and adenomas.  The NOAEL was 500 ppm (22 and 30 mg/kg
b.w./day for male and female rats, respectively).

No evidence of treatment-induced oncogenicity was observed in the mouse
study.  In the rat, a slight increase in thyroid follicular cell
adenomas was seen in both sexes at the high dose when the data from both
chronic and oncogenicity bioassays are combined.

	A non-genotoxic (threshold) mode of action (MOA) for the thyroid
follicular cell adenomas was demonstrated from results of several
studies.

Based on review of the available data, the Reference Dose (RfD) for
boscalid was based on a 1-year feeding study in dogs with a NOAEL of
21.8 mg/kg b.w./day.  Using an uncertainty factor of 100, the RfD is
calculated to be 0.218 mg/kg b.w./day.  Based on the acute toxicity
data, an acute dietary risk assessment is not needed.

Threshold effects.

	Boscalid was shown to be non-carcinogenic in mice.  There was a slight
increase in thyroid follicular cell adenomas at the high dose in both
sexes in the rat.  A non-genotoxic (threshold) MOA was demonstrated for
the thyroid tumors.  The Agency concluded a carcinogenicity
classification of “suggestive evidence of carcinogenicity” and that
a dose response assessment for cancer was not needed.

	6. Animal metabolism. In the rat, the predominant route of excretion of
boscalid (BAS 510F) is fecal with urinary excretion being minor.  The
half-life of boscalid is less than 24 hours.  Saturation of absorption
appears to be occurring at the high dose level. Boscalid is rapidly and
intensively metabolized to a large number of biotransformation products.
 The hydroxylation of the diphenyl moiety was the quantitatively most
important pathway.  Second most important pathway was the Cl
substitution in the 2-chloropyridine ring by SH due to coupling with
glutathione.  No major differences were observed.  In hens and goats the
residues of concern were determined to be parent, the hydroxylated
metabolite M510F01
(2-chloro-N-(4'chloro-5-hydroxy-biphenyl-2-yl)nicotinamide), and the
glucuronic acid metabolite M510F02.

	7. Metabolite toxicology. No additional studies were required for
metabolite toxicology.

	8. Endocrine disruption. No specific tests have been conducted with
boscalid to determine whether the chemical may have an effect in humans
that is similar to an effect produced by a naturally occurring estrogen
or other endocrine effects. However, there were no significant findings
in other relevant toxicity studies (i.e., subchronic and chronic
toxicity, teratology and multi-generation reproductive studies) which
would suggest that boscalid produces endocrine related effects.

C. Aggregate Exposure

	1. Dietary exposure. An assessment was conducted to evaluate the
potential risk due to chronic dietary exposure of the U.S. population
and sub-populations to residues of boscalid.  Tolerance values for
boscalid (BOSCALID) have previously been established and are listed in
U.S. 40 CFR § 180.589.  This analysis included all crops with
established boscalid tolerance values and covers the proposed tolerance
increase for Edible-podded legume vegetables, Crop Subgroup 6A from 1.6
ppm to 5.0 ppm.

	i. Food. Acute Dietary Exposure Assessment

An acute assessment was not needed since the U.S. EPA Toxicological
Endpoint Selection (TES) Committee had previously evaluated the boscalid
toxicity data and determined that there were no toxic effects
attributable to a single dose.  Therefore, a quantitative acute dietary
exposure and risk assessment were not required.

Chronic Dietary Exposure Assessment

A partially refined Tier 1 chronic dietary exposure assessment was
conducted assuming tolerance level residues, experimentally determined
processing factors, and crop treated factors for some crops.  Residues
in animal commodities (i.e. meat, meat byproducts, fat, milk, eggs) were
included at the tolerance levels currently established and listed in
U.S. 40 CFR § 180.589.

Dietary exposure estimates were compared against the established
boscalid chronic Population Adjusted Dose (cPAD) of 0.218 mg/kg b.w./day
for all populations.  The dietary exposure included food and drinking
water.  Results of the chronic dietary assessments are listed in the
Table 1.  The estimated chronic dietary exposure from crops, animal
commodities, and drinking water was less than 32% of the cPAD for all
subpopulations.  The results in Table 1 demonstrate that the exposure
from food and drinking water do not result in an unacceptable risk from
the use of boscalid.

Table 1.  Summary of Chronic Dietary Exposure Assessment

Considering Crops with Established Tolerances, Proposed Tolerance
Increase and Drinking Water from the use of Boscalid.

Population

Subgroups	Exposure Estimate

(mg/kg b.w./day)	% cPAD

U.S. Population	0.025342	12

All Infants	0.067373	31

Children 1-2 years	0.047659	22

Children 3-5 years	0.03714	17

Children 6-12 years	0.024133	11

Youth 13-19 years	0.017378	8

Adults 20-49 years	0.023999	11

Adults 50+ years	0.024369	11

Females 13 – 49	0.023882	11

% cPAD = percent of chronic population adjusted dose

]

	ii. Drinking water. The drinking water concentrations were determined
using PRZM/EXAMS and SCI-GROW models for all uses.  The use resulting in
the highest estimated concentrations was the turf grass use.  These
estimated drinking water concentrations were included in the dietary
exposure modeling.

Acute Aggregate Exposure and Risk (food and water)

Since the U.S. EPA Toxicological Endpoint Selection (TES) Committee has
evaluated the boscalid toxicity data and determined there was no
toxicological endpoints for acute dietary exposure, the determination of
an acute aggregate exposure and risk evaluation was not required.

Short- and Intermediate Term Aggregate Exposure and Risk (food, water,
and residential)

Short- and intermediate-term aggregate exposure takes into account
residential exposure plus chronic exposure from food and water.
Residential exposure is used to refer to non-occupational and
non-dietary exposure.  No new residential uses are currently being
registered for boscalid that would increase non-dietary exposure.  The
boscalid residential exposure values used in this risk assessment were
previously determined by the EPA (May 8, 2013).  The exposure assessment
was conducted using the updated HED’s 2012 Residential SOP’s along
with policy changes for body weight assumptions.  The MOE values are
presented in the Table 2.

Table 2.  Estimated Short/Intermediate Term Aggregate Exposure and Risk
of Boscalid

 (target MOE = 100)

Population	Oral NOAEL (mg/kg/day)	Food + Water  Exposure (mg/kg/day)
Oral MOE	Dermal NOAEL (mg/kg/day)	Residential Exposure (mg/kg/day)
Dermal MOE	Total Combined MOE

Children 6-11 years old	21.8	0.024133	903	21.8	0.022	991	473

Youth 11-16 years old	21.8	0.017378	1254	21.8	0.0018	12111	1137

Adult	21.8	0.025342	860	21.8	0.032	681	380

Total combined MOE = 1/[(1/MOE oral) + (1/MOE dermal)

The results demonstrate there are no safety concerns for any
subpopulation based on established and new uses, and that the results
clearly meet the FQPA standard of reasonable certainty of no harm.

Chronic Aggregate Exposure and Risk (food and water)

The aggregate chronic risk includes residues of boscalid from food and
water (Table 1). Exposures from residential uses are not included in the
chronic aggregate assessment.  The results demonstrate there are no
safety concerns for any subpopulation based on established and new uses,
and that the results clearly meet the FQPA standard of reasonable
certainty of no harm.

	2. Non-dietary exposure. No new residential uses are currently being
registered for boscalid that would result in non-dietary exposure. A
non-occupational dermal post-application exposure/risk assessment for
boscalid was recently conducted by EPA (May 8, 2013).  The highest
post-application for adults and children (6-11 years of age) occurred
from the use in treated gardens and the highest post-application
exposure for youth (11 – 16 years of age) occurred from the use on
golf course turf.   The dermal MOE’s for these uses were all greater
that the limit of concern of 100.

D. Cumulative Effects

	Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) 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.”  Boscalid (BAS 510 F) is a foliar
fungicide chemically belonging to the carboxin class of fungicides.
Boscalid (BAS 510 F) acts in the fungal cell by inhibiting mitochondrial
respiration through inhibition of the succinate-ubiquinone oxidase
reductase system in Complex II of the mitochondrial electron transport
chain. Boscalid (BAS 510 F) shares this mode of action with other
currently registered U.S. fungicides, such as fluxapyroxad and
fluopyram.

.

The EPA is currently developing methodology to perform cumulative risk
assessments.  At this time, there is no available data to determine
whether boscalid (BAS 510 F) has a common mechanism of toxicity with
other substances or how to include this pesticide in a cumulative risk
assessment. Unlike other pesticides for which EPA has followed a
cumulative risk approach based on a common mechanism of toxicity,
boscalid (BAS 510 F) does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite
produced by other substances.

E. Safety Determination

	1. U.S. population. Based on this risk assessment, BASF concludes that
the aggregate exposure to boscalid from all currently registered and
proposed new tolerances does not result in an unacceptable risk.

	2. Infants and children. Based on this risk assessment, BASF concludes
that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants
or children from the aggregate exposure to boscalid residues.

F. International Tolerances

	A Codex maximum residue level (MRL) of 3.0 ppm exists for residues of
boscalid in or on edible-podded beans and peas.

 PAGE

 PAGE   2


[Federal Register: March 25, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 56)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 12832-12833]
[DOCID:fr25mr09-69]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

44 CFR Part 67

[Docket ID FEMA-2008-0020; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-1022]

Proposed Flood Elevation Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Proposed Rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: On December 9, 2008, FEMA published in the Federal Register a
proposed rule that contained an erroneous table. This notice provides
corrections to that table, to be used in lieu of the information
published at 73 FR 74674. The table provided here represents the
flooding source, location of referenced elevation, effective and
modified elevation, and communities affected for the Unincorporated
Areas of Marshall County, Illinois. Specifically, it addresses flooding
sources Sandy Creek Tributary.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William R. Blanton, Jr., Chief,
Engineering Management Branch, Mitigation Directorate, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472,
(202) 646-3151 or (e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) publishes proposed determinations of Base (1% annual-chance)
Flood Elevations (BFEs) and modified BFEs for communities participating
in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), in accordance with
section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C.
4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a).
    These proposed BFEs and modified BFEs, together with the floodplain
management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum that are
required. They should not be construed to mean that the community must
change any existing ordinances that are more stringent in their
floodplain management requirements. The community may at any time enact
stricter requirements of its own, or pursuant to policies established
by other Federal, State, or regional entities. These proposed
elevations are used to meet the floodplain management requirements of
the NFIP and are also used to calculate the appropriate flood insurance
premium rates for new buildings built after these elevations are made
final, and for the contents in these buildings.

Correction

    In the proposed rule published at 73 FR 74674, in the December 9,
2008 issue of the Federal Register, FEMA published a table under the
authority of 44 CFR 67.4. The table, entitled ``Proposed Flood
Elevation Determinations; Correction'' addressed flooding sources
``Sandy Creek Tributary.'' That table contained inaccurate information
as to the location of referenced elevation, effective and modified
elevation in feet, or communities affected for these flooding sources.
In this notice, FEMA is publishing a table containing the accurate
information, to address these prior errors. The information provided
below should be used in lieu of that previously published notice.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     * Elevation in feet
                                                                     (NGVD) + Elevation
                                                                       in feet (NAVD)
                                                                      Depth in
         Flooding source(s)              Location of referenced       feet above ground    Communities affected
                                               elevation**          [caret] Elevation in
                                                                        meters (MSL)
                                                                   ----------------------
                                                                    Effective   Modified
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 Marshall County, Illinois Unincorporated Areas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy Creek Tributary...............  From County Highway 14......       None       +673  Unincorporated Areas
                                                                                of Marshall County.
                                      To approximately 140 feet          None       +686
                                       northwest of the
                                       intersection of Hickory
                                       Street and South 5th Street
                                       in the City of Wenona.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Dated: February 6, 2009.
Michael K. Buckley,
Acting Assistant Administrator, Mitigation Directorate, Department of
Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
 [FR Doc. E9-6691 Filed 3-24-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9110-12-P