[Federal Register: February 25, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 37)]
[Notices]
[Page 10018-10019]
[DOCID:fr25fe08-59]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

February 19, 2008.
    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:
    Docket Numbers: RP99-176-152.
    Applicants: Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America.
    Description: Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America submits Second
Revised Sheet 26B.03 et al. to its FERC Gas Tariff, Sixth Revised
Volume 1 of the following tariff sheets proposed to be effective 4/1/
08.
    Filed Date: 02/15/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080215-0224.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, February 27, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP99-176-153.
    Applicants: Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America.
    Description: Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America submits Sixth
Revised Sheet 26P-02 and 26P-03 and Original Sheet 414A.16 of its FERC
Gas tariff sheets proposed to be effective 4/1/08.
    Filed Date: 02/15/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080215-0225.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, February 27, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP06-407-008.
    Applicants: Gas Transmission Northwest Corporation.
    Description: Gas Transmission Northwest Corporation submits
Substitute Second Revised Sheets 133A et al. to FERC Gas Tariff, Third
Revised Volume 1-A to be effective 1/1/07.
    Filed Date: 02/14/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080215-0216.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, February 26, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP07-561-001.
    Applicants: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP.
    Description: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP submits Substitute
First Revised Sheet 716 et al. to FERC Gas Tariff, Sixth Revised Volume
1, to be effective 2/3/08.
    Filed Date: 02/14/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080215-0215.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, February 26, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP08-198-000.
    Applicants: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP.
    Description: Gulf South Pipeline Company submits Third Revised
Sheet 805A et al. to FERC Gas Tariff, Sixth Revised Volume 1, to be
effective 3/17/08.
    Filed Date: 02/15/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080215-0222.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, February 27, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP08-199-000.
    Applicants: Hardy Storage Company, LLC.
    Description: Hardy Storage Company, LLC submits First Revised Sheet
10 to its FERC Gas Tariff, Original Volume 1 Tariff with a proposed
effective date of April 1, 2008.
    Filed Date: 02/15/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080215-0223.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, February 27, 2008.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings 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 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. 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. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    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
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings 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 e-mail notification when a document
is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance with any FERC
Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call (866)
208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-3359 Filed 2-22-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 226 (Tuesday, November 24, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73198-73199]
[FR Doc No: 2015-29836]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[USCG-2015-1005]

Merchant Mariner Medical Advisory Committee; Vacancies

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Request for applications.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard seeks applications for membership on the
Merchant Mariner Medical Advisory Committee. The Merchant Mariner
Medical Advisory Committee provides advice and recommendations to the
Secretary on matters related to medical certification determinations
for issuance of licenses, certificates of registry, and merchant
mariners' documents; medical standards and guidelines for the physical
qualifications of operators of commercial vessels; medical examiner
education; and medical research. Applicants selected for service on the
Merchant Mariner Medical Advisory Committee via this solicitation will
not begin their respective term until August 8, 2016.

DATES: Completed applications should reach the Coast Guard on or before
January 25, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Applicants should send a cover letter expressing interest in
an appointment to the Merchant Mariner Medical Advisory Committee that
also identifies which membership category the applicant is applying
under, along with a resume detailing the applicant's experience via one
of the following methods:
     By Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     By Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     By Mail: Lieutenant Ashley Holm, Alternate Designated
Federal Officer of the Merchant Mariner Medical Advisory Committee,
Commandant, Mariner Credentialing Program Policy Division (CG-CVC-4),
U.S. Coast Guard, 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Ave. SE., Stop 7501
Washington, DC 20593-7501.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant Ashley Holm, Alternate
Designated Federal Officer of the Merchant Mariner Medical Advisory
Committee, Commandant, Mariner Credentialing Program Policy Division
(CG-CVC-4), U.S. Coast Guard, 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Ave. SE.,
Stop 7501 Washington, DC 20593-7501<EMAIL_ADDRESS>phone:
202-372-1128, fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Merchant Mariner Medical Advisory
Committee was established under Section 210 of the Coast Guard

Authorization Act of 2010, Public Law 111-281 and operates in
accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act,
(5 U.S.C. Appendix). The Committee's purpose is to provide advice and
recommendations to the Secretary on matters related to medical
certification determinations for issuance of licenses, certificates of
registry, and merchant mariners' documents; medical standards and
guidelines for the physical qualifications of operators of commercial
vessels; medical examiner education; and medical research.
    The Merchant Mariner Medical Advisory Committee is expected to meet
at least twice a year at various locations around the country. It may
also meet intercessionally for extraordinary purposes. Working groups
may also meet to consider specific tasks as required.
    The Coast Guard will consider applications for seven positions that
expire on August 8, 2016. These positions include two professional
mariners with knowledge and experience in mariners' occupational
requirements, and five health care professionals with particular
expertise, knowledge, or experience regarding the medical examinations
of merchant mariners or occupational medicine.
    The members appointed will serve a term of office of five years.
The members are limited to serving no more than two consecutive terms.
All members serve without compensation from the Federal Government;
however, members may be reimbursed for travel and per diem depending on
fiscal budgetary constraints.
    Members of the Merchant Mariner Medical Advisory Committee will be
appointed and serve as Special Government Employees as defined in
section 202(a) of Title 18 United States Code. As candidates for
appointment as Special Government Employees, applicants are required to
complete Confidential Financial Disclosure Reports (OGE Form 450).
Coast Guard may not release the reports or the information in them to
the public except under an order issued by a Federal court or as
otherwise provided under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a). Only the
Designated Coast Guard Ethics Official or his designee may release a
Confidential Financial Disclosure Report. Applicants can obtain this
form by going to the Web site of the Office of Government Ethics
(www.oge.gov), or by contacting the individual listed above in FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Applications for a Special Government
Employees that are not accompanied by a completed OGE Form 450 will not
be considered.
    Registered lobbyists are not eligible to serve on Federal advisory
committees in an individual capacity. Registered lobbyists are
lobbyists required to comply with provisions contained in the Lobbying
Disclosure Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1605; Pub. L. 104-65; as amended by
Title II of Pub. L. 110-81).
    The Merchant Mariner Medical Advisory Committee members are
appointed in their individual capacity and would be designated as a
Special Government Employee as defined in 202(a) of Title 18, U.S.C.
See ``Revised Guidance on Appointment of Lobbyist to Federal Advisory
Committees, Boards and Commissions'' (79 FR 47482, August 13, 2014).
    The Department of Homeland Security does not discriminate in
selection of Committee members on the basis of race, color, religion,
sex, national origin, political affiliation, sexual orientation, gender
identity, marital status, disabilities and genetic information, age,
membership in an employee organization, or any other non-merit factor.
The Department of Homeland Security strives to achieve a widely diverse
candidate pool for all of its recruitment actions.
    If you are interested in applying to become a member of the
Committee, send your cover letter and resume to Lieutenant Ashley Holm,
Designated Alternate Federal Officer of the Merchant Mariner Medical
Advisory Committee by email or mail according to instructions in the
ADDRESSES section by the deadline in the DATES section of this notice.
    All email submittals will receive email receipt confirmation.
    To visit our online docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov enter
the docket number (for this notice (USCG-2015-1005) in the Search box,
and click ``Search''. Please do not post your resume or OGE 450 Form on
this site.

    Dated: November 17, 2015.
V.B. Gifford, Jr.,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Director, Inspections and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2015-29836 Filed 11-23-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 118 (Tuesday, June 19, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36606-36607]
[FR Doc No: 2012-14903]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

[Docket ID PHMSA-2012-0146]

Pipeline Safety: Government/Industry Pipeline Research and
Development Forum, Public Meeting

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA),
DOT.

ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
(PHMSA) and the National Association of Pipeline Safety Representatives
are hosting a Government/Industry Pipeline Research and Development
(R&D) Forum. The R&D Forums are held periodically to generate a
National research agenda that will foster solutions for the many
challenges with pipeline safety and with protecting the environment.
    The forum allows public, government and industry pipeline
stakeholders to discuss the technical gaps and challenges for future
research. The forum is also intended to help reduce duplication of
programs, factor ongoing research efforts, leverage resources and
broaden synergies. The national research agenda coming out of these
events is aligned with the needs of the pipeline safety mission, makes
use of the best available knowledge and expertise, and considers
stakeholder perspectives. Specifically the forum will:
     Identify key pipeline technical challenges facing industry
and government;
     Disseminate information on current research efforts; and
     Identify new research that can help to meet known
challenges.
    The Forum will be structured with a combination of general sessions
to provide introductory, panel, and summary presentations, and
concurrent working group sessions.

DATES: The R&D Forum will be held July 18, 2012, from 8:00 a.m. until
approximately 5:00 p.m. EDT and July 19, 2012, from 8:00 a.m. to 4:40
p.m. EDT. Name badge pickup and onsite registration will be available
starting at 7:00 a.m. EDT each day.

ADDRESSES: The forum will be held at The Westin Arlington Gateway, 801
North Glebe Road, Arlington, Virginia, 22203, Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, Web
site: http://www.WestinArlingtonGateway.com/. Please contact the Westin
directly to make room reservations. When making your hotel reservation,
please use the Room Block Name: ``DOT R&D Forum.'' There will be a room
rate of $169/night for the nights of July 17 and 18. A very small block
of rooms is also available at this rate on the night of July 19. The
deadline for securing a room at the rate of $169/night is June 30. The
meeting rooms will be posted at the hotel on the days of the forum.
    The Hotel is Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant having
12 ADA accessible guest rooms. All public spaces are ADA accessible.
Contact the Westin for more information.
    Refer to the meeting Web site for updated registration information,
agenda, and times at https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/meetings/MtgHome.mtg?mtg=77. Please note that the forum will not be webcast due
to the numerous concurrent running sessions. All presentations will be
available on the meeting Web site within days following the forum.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Merritt at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Preliminary Agenda

July 18

     Overcoming Challenges with the PHMSA Program (General
Session)
     Panel 1--National Perspectives on Key Challenges (General
Session)
     Panel 2--Current Research Roadmaps (General Session)
     Panel 3--Advancing Technology into the Market (General
Session)
     Working Group Overview (General Session)
     Working Groups Phase 1 (Concurrent Sessions)
    --Working Group 1: Threat Prevention
    --Working Group 2: Leak Detection/Mitigation & Storage
    --Working Group 3: Anomaly Detection/Characterization
    --Working Group 4: Anomaly Repair & Remediation
    --Working Group 5: Design/Materials/Welding-Joining/Valves

July 19

 Working Groups Phase 2 (Concurrent Sessions)
 Working Groups Phase 3 (Concurrent Sessions)
 Working Group Reports-Out (General Session)
 Summary and Next Steps (General Session)

    Issued in Washington, DC, on June 14, 2012.
Linda Daugherty,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Policy and Programs.
[FR Doc. 2012-14903 Filed 6-18-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 52 (Monday, March 20, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14361-14362]
[FR Doc No: 2017-05465]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OW-2016-0686; FRL 9960-12-OW]

Request for Public Comments on Peer Review Candidates for
Proposed Modeling Approaches for a Health-Based Benchmark for Lead in
Drinking Water

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requests
comments on the candidates being considered as expert peer reviewers
for the draft modeling report entitled, ``Proposed Modeling Approaches
for a Health-Based Benchmark for Lead in Drinking Water'' (lead
modeling report). EPA is seeking comment and information about the
expertise and qualifications of the candidates. See section II of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this notice for the interim list
of candidates.

DATES: Comments on the interim list of potential peer review candidates
must be received on or before April 19, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments on the interim list of potential peer
review candidates to EPA's peer review contractor, ERG, Inc., no later
than April 19, 2017 by one of the following methods:
     Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(subject line: Lead in Drinking
Water Peer Review).
     Mail: ERG, Inc., 110 Hartwell Avenue, Lexington, MA 02421,
ATTN: Laurie Waite (must arrive by the comment period deadline).

    Please be advised that public comments are subject to release under
the Freedom of Information Act.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Questions concerning the interim list
of expert peer reviewers should be directed to ERG, Inc., 110 Hartwell
Avenue, Lexington, MA 02421; by email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(subject line:
Lead in Drinking Water Peer Review); or by phone:<PHONE_NUMBER> (ask
for Laurie Waite).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Process of Obtaining Candidates for Consideration

    EPA's contractor, ERG, is assembling a panel of scientific experts
to evaluate the ``Proposed Modeling Approaches for a Health-Based
Benchmark for Lead in Drinking Water'' report. EPA, through its
contractor, is seeking peer reviewers who possess a strong background
and demonstrated expertise in one or more of the following areas: (1)
Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic modeling, particularly with
regard to lead, (2) environmental lead exposure analyses, particularly
with regard to probabilistic modeling. EPA published a request for
nominations of peer reviewers in a January 19, 2017, Federal Register
notice (82 FR 6546). The nomination period closed on February 21,2017.
ERG also conducted an independent search for scientific experts to
augment the list of publically-nominated candidates. In total, ERG
evaluated 26 candidates that were nominated during the public
nomination period or identified independently by ERG.

Screening Process

    ERG considered and screened all candidates against the selection
criteria, which include the following: (1) Demonstrated expertise
through relevant peer reviewed publications; (2) professional
accomplishments and recognition by professional societies; (3)
demonstrated ability to work constructively and effectively in a
committee setting; (4) absence of financial conflicts of interest; (5)
no actual conflicts of interest or appearance of lack of impartiality;
(6) willingness to commit adequate time for the thorough review of the
draft report; and (7) availability to participate in-person in a one-
day or two-day peer review meeting in the Washington, DC, metro area,
projected to occur in the summer of 2017 (exact date will be published
in the Federal Register at least 30 days prior to the external peer
review meeting). Following the screening process, the contractor
narrowed the list of potential reviewers to 13 candidates. EPA is now
soliciting comments on this interim list. EPA requests that the public
provide relevant information or documentation on the expertise that the
contractor should consider in evaluating these candidates. ERG will
consider all comments received in response to this notice in the
selection of the final peer review panel, which will collectively
provide appropriate expertise spanning the subject matter areas covered
by the report and, to the extent feasible, best provide a balance of
perspectives. See section II of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
of this notice for the interim list of candidates.

Responsibilities of Peer Reviewers

    Peer reviewers will be charged with evaluating and preparing
written comments on the lead modeling report. ERG will provide
reviewers with a summary and compilation of public comments on the
report submitted to EPA's docket (ID number EPA-HQ-OW-2016-0686) for
consideration. Reviewers will participate in the public meeting
expected to be held in the Washington, DC, metro area in the summer of
2017 (exact date to be determined), to discuss the scientific basis
supporting these materials. Following the meeting, ERG will provide a
report to EPA of the peer reviewer's evaluation of the scientific and
technical merit of the lead modeling report and their responses to the
charge questions. EPA will make the final expert peer review report
available to the public (exact date to be determined). In preparing the
final lead modeling report, EPA will consider the expert peer review
report as well as the written public comments submitted to the docket.

II. Interim List of Peer Reviewers

    ERG is considering the following candidates for the peer review
panel. Biosketches are available through the docket at https://www.regulations.gov (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2016-0686). After review
and consideration of public comments on the interim list of candidates
being considered, ERG will select the final peer reviewers from this
interim list, who will, collectively, best provide expertise spanning
the areas of knowledge and experience described in the Federal Register
notice (82 FR 6546) and, to the extent feasible, best provide a balance
of perspectives. EPA will announce the peer review panel meeting date,
location and observer registration details, along with the final list
of peer reviewers selected by ERG, at least 30 days prior to the
meeting.

Name of Nominee, Degree, Place of Employment

1. Stuart Batterman, Ph.D., University of Michigan
2. Teresa Bowers, Ph.D., Gradient Corporation
3. Panos Georgopoulos, Ph.D., Rutgers University
4. Philip Goodrum, Ph.D., Integral Consulting, Inc.
5. Bruce Lanphear, Ph.D., Simon Fraser University
6. France Lemieux, MCE, Government (Canada)
7. Anne Loccisano, Ph.D., Exponent, Inc.
8. Allan H. Marcus, Ph.D., Private Consultant
9. Marc A. Nascarella, Ph.D., Massachusetts Department of Public Health
10. Michele Provost, Ph.D., Polytechnique Montreal
11. Barry Ryan, Ph.D., Emory University
12. Ian von Lindern, Ph.D., TerraGraphics International
13. Kathleen Vork, Ph.D., California Office of Environment Health
Hazard

    Dated: March 7, 2017.
Michael H. Shapiro,
Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of Water.
[FR Doc. 2017-05465 Filed 3-17-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 6 (Monday, January 10, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1165-1166]
[FR Doc No: 2022-00205]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2021-0002; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-2191]

Proposed Flood Hazard Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland
Security.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Comments are requested on proposed flood hazard
determinations, which may include additions or modifications of any
Base Flood Elevation (BFE), base flood depth, Special Flood Hazard Area
(SFHA) boundary or zone designation, or

regulatory floodway on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and where
applicable, in the supporting Flood Insurance Study (FIS) reports for
the communities listed in the table below. The purpose of this notice
is to seek general information and comment regarding the preliminary
FIRM, and where applicable, the FIS report that the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) has provided to the affected communities. The
FIRM and FIS report are the basis of the floodplain management measures
that the community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of
having in effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for
participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).

DATES: Comments are to be submitted on or before April 11, 2022.

ADDRESSES: The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, the FIS report
for each community are available for inspection at both the online
location https://hazards.fema.gov/femaportal/prelimdownload and the
respective Community Map Repository address listed in the tables below.
Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS report for each
community are accessible online through the FEMA Map Service Center at
https://msc.fema.gov for comparison.
    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FEMA-B-2191, to
Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance
and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW, Washington, DC
20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email) [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering
Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA,
400 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email)
[email protected]; or visit the FEMA Mapping and Insurance
eXchange (FMIX) online at https://www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FEMA proposes to make flood hazard
determinations for each community listed below, 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 flood hazard determinations, 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 flood
hazard determinations are used to meet the floodplain management
requirements of the NFIP.
    The communities affected by the flood hazard determinations are
provided in the tables below. Any request for reconsideration of the
revised flood hazard information shown on the Preliminary FIRM and FIS
report that satisfies the data requirements outlined in 44 CFR 67.6(b)
is considered an appeal. Comments unrelated to the flood hazard
determinations also will be considered before the FIRM and FIS report
become effective.
    Use of a Scientific Resolution Panel (SRP) is available to
communities in support of the appeal resolution process. SRPs are
independent panels of experts in hydrology, hydraulics, and other
pertinent sciences established to review conflicting scientific and
technical data and provide recommendations for resolution. Use of the
SRP only may be exercised after FEMA and local communities have been
engaged in a collaborative consultation process for at least 60 days
without a mutually acceptable resolution of an appeal. Additional
information regarding the SRP process can be found online at https://www.floodsrp.org/pdfs/srp_overview.pdf.
    The watersheds and/or communities affected are listed in the tables
below. The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, FIS report for each
community are available for inspection at both the online location
https://hazards.fema.gov/femaportal/prelimdownload and the respective
Community Map Repository address listed in the tables. For communities
with multiple ongoing Preliminary studies, the studies can be
identified by the unique project number and Preliminary FIRM date
listed in the tables. Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS
report for each community are accessible online through the FEMA Map
Service Center at https://msc.fema.gov for comparison.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, ``Flood
Insurance.'')

Michael M. Grimm,
Assistant Administrator for Risk Management, Department of Homeland
Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Community map repository
               Community                             address
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Stevens County, Minnesota and Incorporated Areas
        Project: 18-05-0004S Preliminary Date: September 30, 2021
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stevens County Unincorporated Areas....  Stevens County Courthouse, 400
                                          Colorado Avenue, Morris, MN
                                          56267.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Pendleton County, West Virginia and Incorporated Areas
        Project: 21-03-0003S Preliminary Date: September 07, 2021
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pendleton County Unincorporated Areas..  Pendleton County Courthouse,
                                          100 South Main Street,
                                          Franklin, WV 26807.
Town of Franklin.......................  Town Office, 305 North High
                                          Street, Franklin, WV 26807.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2022-00205 Filed 1-7-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-12-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 237 (Thursday, December 10, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 76697-76699]
[FR Doc No: 2015-31095]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2014-E-0271]

Determination of Regulatory Review Period for Purposes of Patent
Extension; ARGUS II VISUAL STIMULATION SYSTEM

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has determined the
regulatory review period for ARGUS II VISUAL STIMULATION SYSTEM and is
publishing this notice of that determination as required by law. FDA
has made the determination because of the submission of an application
to the Director of the U.S. Patent and

Trademark Office (USPTO), Department of Commerce, for the extension of
a patent which claims that medical device.

DATES: Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published (see
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section) are incorrect may submit either
electronic or written comments and ask for a redetermination by
February 8, 2016. Furthermore, any interested person may petition FDA
for a determination regarding whether the applicant for extension acted
with due diligence during the regulatory review period by June 7, 2016.
See ``Petitions'' in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for more
information.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments as follows:

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to http://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on http://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Division of
Dockets Management, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2014-E-0271 for Determination of Regulatory Review Period for
Purposes of Patent Extension; ARGUS II VISUAL STIMULATION SYSTEM.
Received comments will be placed in the docket and, except for those
submitted as ``Confidential Submissions,'' publicly viewable at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Division of Dockets Management between 9
a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
    Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made publicly available, submit
your comments only as a written/paper submission. You should submit two
copies total. One copy will include the information you claim to be
confidential with a heading or cover note that states ``THIS DOCUMENT
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION''. The Agency will review this copy,
including the claimed confidential information, in its consideration of
comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed confidential
information redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing
and posted on http://www.regulations.gov. Submit both copies to the
Division of Dockets Management. If you do not wish your name and
contact information to be made publicly available, you can provide this
information on the cover sheet and not in the body of your comments and
you must identify this information as ``confidential.'' Any information
marked as ``confidential'' will not be disclosed except in accordance
with 21 CFR 10.20 and other applicable disclosure law. For more
information about FDA's posting of comments to public dockets, see 80
FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or access the information at: http://www.fda.gov/regulatoryinformation/dockets/default.htm.: For access to
the docket to read background documents or the electronic and written/
paper comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov and insert
the docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document,
into the ``Search'' box and follow the prompts and/or go to the
Division of Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville,
MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Beverly Friedman, Office of Regulatory
Policy, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg.
51, Rm. 6250, Silver Spring, MD 20993,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984
(Pub. L. 98-417) and the Generic Animal Drug and Patent Term
Restoration Act (Pub. L. 100-670) generally provide that a patent may
be extended for a period of up to 5 years so long as the patented item
(human drug product, animal drug product, medical device, food
additive, or color additive) was subject to regulatory review by FDA
before the item was marketed. Under these acts, a product's regulatory
review period forms the basis for determining the amount of extension
an applicant may receive.
    A regulatory review period consists of two periods of time: A
testing phase and an approval phase. For medical devices, the testing
phase begins with a clinical investigation of the device and runs until
the approval phase begins. The approval phase starts with the initial
submission of an application to market the device and continues until
permission to market the device is granted. Although only a portion of
a regulatory review period may count toward the actual amount of
extension that the Director of USPTO may award (half the testing phase
must be subtracted as well as any time that may have occurred before
the patent was issued), FDA's determination of the length of a
regulatory review period for a medical device will include all of the
testing phase and approval phase as specified in 35 U.S.C.
156(g)(3)(B).
    FDA has approved for marketing the medical device ARGUS II VISUAL
STIMULATION SYSTEM. ARGUS II VISUAL STIMULATION SYSTEM is indicated for
patients aged 25 years and older with bare or no light perception
vision caused by advanced retinitis pigmentosa. Subsequent to this
approval, the USPTO received a patent term restoration application for
ARGUS II VISUAL STIMULATION SYSTEM (U.S. Patent No. 7,668,599) from
Second Sight Medical Products, Inc., and the USPTO requested FDA's
assistance in determining this patent's eligibility for patent term
restoration. In a letter dated May 22, 2014, FDA advised the USPTO that
this medical device had undergone a regulatory review period and that
the approval of ARGUS II VISUAL STIMULATION SYSTEM represented the
first permitted commercial marketing or use of the product. Thereafter,
the USPTO requested that FDA determine the product's regulatory review
period.

II. Determination of Regulatory Review Period

    FDA has determined that the applicable regulatory review period for
ARGUS II VISUAL STIMULATION SYSTEM is 2,282 days. Of this time, 1,630
days occurred during the testing phase of the regulatory review period,
while 652 days occurred during the approval phase. These periods of
time were derived from the following dates:
    1. The date an exemption under section 520(g) of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 360j(g)) involving
this device became effective: November 17, 2006. The applicant claims
that the investigational device exemption (IDE) required under section
520(g) of the FD&C act for human tests to begin became effective on
December 31, 2004. However, FDA records indicate that the IDE was
determined substantially complete for clinical studies to have begun on
November 17, 2006, which represents the IDE effective date.
    2. The date an application was initially submitted with respect to
the device under section 515 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360e): May 4,
2011. The applicant claims May 3, 2011, as the date the humanitarian
device exemption (HDE) for Argus II Visual Stimulation System (HDE
H110002) was initially submitted. However, FDA records indicate that
HDE H110002 was submitted on May 4, 2011.
    3. The date the application was approved: February 13, 2013. The
applicant claims that HDE H110002 was approved on February 14, 2013.
However, FDA records indicate that ARGUS II VISUAL STIMULATION SYSTEM
was approved on February 13, 2013.
    This determination of the regulatory review period establishes the
maximum potential length of a patent extension. However, the USPTO
applies several statutory limitations in its calculations of the actual
period for patent extension. In its application for patent extension,
this applicant seeks 1,735 days of patent term extension.

III. Petitions

    Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published are
incorrect may submit either electronic or written comments and ask for
a redetermination (see DATES). Furthermore, any interested person may
petition FDA for a determination regarding whether the applicant for
extension acted with due diligence during the regulatory review period.
To meet its burden, the petition must be timely (see DATES) and contain
sufficient facts to merit an FDA investigation. (See H. Rept. 857, part
1, 98th Cong., 2d sess., pp. 41-42, 1984.) Petitions should be in the
format specified in 21 CFR 10.30.
    Submit petitions electronically to http://www.regulations.gov at
Docket No. FDA-2013-S-0610. Submit written petitions (two copies are
required) to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and
Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
Petitions that have not been made publicly available on http://www.regulations.gov may be viewed in the Division of Dockets Management
between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

    Dated: December 4, 2015.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015-31095 Filed 12-9-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


<EPA REGISTRATION DIVISION COMPANY NOTICE OF FILING FOR PESTICIDE
PETITIONS PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER  (1/1/2007)>

<EPA Registration Division contact: Joanne Miller Product Manager 21
(703) 305-6224 >

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

<TEMPLATE:>

<[Nichino America, Inc.]>

<[Pesticide Petition No. 7F7190]>

<	EPA has received a pesticide petition (PP # 7F7190) from Nichino
America, Inc. 4550 New Linden Hill Road Suite 501 Wilmington, DE 19808
proposing, 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 180.585>

<>

<	1. by establishing a tolerance for residues of pyraflufen-ethyl for
combined residues of the herbicide, pyraflufen-ethyl (ethyl
2-chloro-5-(4-chloro-5-difluoromethoxy-(1-methyl-1H-pyrazol-3-yl)-4-fluo
rophenoxyacetate) and its acid metabolite, E-1
(2-chloro-5-(4-chloro-5-difluoromethoxy-(1-methyl-1H-pyrazol-3-yl)-4-flu
orophenoxyacetic acid), expressed in terms of the parent, in or on the
following raw agricultural commodities: soybeans: beans, forage at 0.05
parts per million (ppm), beans hay; at 0.1 parts per million (ppm). Also
grass forage, Crop Group 17 at 1.0 parts per million (ppm) and grass,
hay, crop group 17 at 1.2 parts per million (ppm).

>

<	2. to establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for
“NA-Remove”>

<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. The qualitative nature of the residues of

pyraflufen-ethyl (ET-751) in corn, soybeans, and wheat and pasture grass
is adequately understood. The metabolism of pyraflufen-ethyl has been
studied in cotton, wheat, and potato. Metabolism in the plant involves
ester hydrolysis, de-methylation on the pyrazole ring and further
degradation of the phenoyxyacetate moiety to bound polar metabolites.
The nature of the residue is adequately understood and the residues of
concern are the parent, pyraflufen-ethyl, and the acid metabolite, E-1,
only.

>

<2. Analytical method. Aqueous organic solvent extraction, column clean
up, and quantitation by gas chromatography is used to measure and
evaluate the chemical residues.

>

<	3. Magnitude of residues. Several residue trials were conducted in
corn, soybeans, wheat, and pasture grass to satisfy the required EPA
region locations.   Based on these data, it is proposed that the Agency
retain established tolerances (40 CFR §180.585) for pyraflufen-ethyl
(ET-751) and its acid metabolite (E-1) for corn, grain, corn, stover,
corn, forage at 0.01 ppm; soybean seed and soybean forage at 0.01 ppm,
and wheat forage and hay at 0.1 ppm, wheat grain and wheat straw at 0.01
ppm and establish new tolerances in soybean hay at 0.1 ppm, pasture
grass forage at 1.0 ppm and pasture grass hay at 1.2 ppm.

>

    	4. Magnitude of the residue in animals.--i. Ruminants. The results
of the meat and milk 28-day feeding study conclude that no finite
residues of the parent, ET-751 or the metabolite E-15 can be detected in
milk at a dose level of 10 ppm, and that no residues of either ET-751 or
the acid metabolite, E-1, are detected in muscle, liver or fat tissues,
and low level residues of 0.0336 ppm in kidney tissues.  These results
concur with those of an earlier ruminant metabolism study (MRID
45283005) at a dose of 10 ppm. Since the results of this livestock
feeding study indicates that no finite residues could be detected in
meat and milk commodities from the anticipated dietary burdens based on
crop residue data, no tolerances for livestock commodities meat and milk
are proposed in this petition.

    ii. Poultry. The maximum poultry dietary burden results from a diet

comprised of cotton meal, corn grain, corn milled byproducts, soybean
seed, soybean meal, soybean hulls, wheat grain, and wheat milled
byproducts for a total dietary burden that is significantly lower than
the levels that would require the proposal of tolerances in poultry.
This conclusion is based on the exaggerated rate metabolism studies
carried out on pyraflufen-ethyl and its acid metabolite. Therefore, an
exemption from tolerances in poultry meat, meat byproducts, fat, and

eggs under 40 CFR 180.6(a)(3) and (b) is proposed as it is not possible
to establish with certainty whether finite residues will be incurred,
but there is no reasonable expectation of finite residues.

<B. Toxicological Profile>

<	1. Acute toxicity.  [Insert text.] “NA-Remove”>

<	2. Genotoxicty. [Insert text.] “NA-Remove”>

<	3. Reproductive and developmental toxicity. [Insert text.]
“NA-Remove”>

<	4. Subchronic toxicity. [Insert text.] “NA-Remove”

>

<	5. Chronic toxicity. [Insert text.] “NA-Remove”

	EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities of
major identifiable subgroups of consumers,

including infants and children. The nature of the toxic effects caused
by pyraflufen-ethyl as well as the no observed adverse effect level
(NOAEL) and the lowest

observed adverse effect level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies reviewed
are discussed in the Federal Register of April 30, 2003 (  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/EPA-PEST/2003/April/Day-30/p10264.htm"  68 FR 23046
) (FRL-7300-9).

>

<	6. Animal metabolism.  The qualitative nature of the residues of
pyraflufen-ethyl and its acid metabolite, E-1, in animals is adequately
understood. Pyraflufen-ethyl is rapidly absorbed, metabolized, and
excreted to feces and urine, with greater than 90% of the administered
dose excreted within 24 hours in rats. Based on metabolism studies with
goats, hens, and rats, there is no reasonable expectation that
measurable pyraflufen-ethyl-related residues will occur in meat, milk,
poultry, or eggs from the proposed use.

>

<	7. Metabolite toxicology. No toxicologically significant metabolites
were detected in plant or animal metabolism studies for cotton or
potatoes.

>

<	8. Endocrine disruption. Chronic, lifespan, and multigenerational

bioassays in mammals and acute and subchronic studies on aquatic
organisms and wildlife did not reveal any endocrine effects for
pyraflufen-ethyl. Any endocrine related effects would have been detected
in this comprehensive series of required tests. The probability of any
such effect due to agricultural uses of pyraflufen-

ethyl is negligible.

>

<C. Aggregate Exposure>

<	1. Dietary exposure. Acute dietary risk assessments are performed for
a food-use pesticide, if toxicological study has indicated the
possibility of an effect of concern occurring as a result of a one-day
or single exposure.  No adverse effect attributable to a single exposure
(dose) was observed in oral toxicity studies, including the
developmental toxicity studies in rats and rabbits.  Therefore, EPA did
not identify an acute dietary endpoint and an acute dietary assessment
was not performed.  Chronic dietary risk analyses was conducted to
estimate potential pyraflufen-ethyl residues in/on the following crops:
corn, soybeans, wheat, and pasture grass using Dietary Exposure
Evaluation Model Software with the Food Commodity Intake Database
(DEEM-FCID).  These estimates assume that 100% of the crops contained
pyraflufen-ethyl and tolerance-level residues for pyroflufen-ethyl on
all treated crops.   Exposure estimates to water were based on modeling
with FIRST and SCI-GROW.

>

<	i. Food. The chronic population adjusted dose (cPAD) for the

general population, based on residues at the tolerance levels and 100%

of corn, soybeans, potato, wheat, and cotton crops treated was
calculated by the EPA in the Federal Register of  May 12, 2004 (69 FR
26305) (FRL-7358-2).  EPA has projected that exposure to
pyraflufen-ethyl from food will utilize <1% of the cPAD of 0.2 mg/kg/day
for the U.S. population and <1% of cPAD for children (1-6 years).

>

<	ii. Drinking water. The residue of concern in drinking water was
determined to be pyraflufen-ethyl.  Based on the FIRST and SCI-GROW
models, the EECs of pyraflufen-ethyl for acute exposures are estimated
to be 1.25 parts per billion (ppb) for surface water and 0.002 ppb for
ground water. The EECs for chronic exposures are estimated to be 0.28
ppb for surface water and 0.002 ppb for ground water.

	2. Non-dietary exposure. EPA calculated the non-dietary exposure
scenarios in the Federal Register May 12, 2004 (69 FR 26305)
(FRL-7358-2). Pyraflufen-ethyl is registered in several non-food sites,
including airports, commercial plants, nurseries and ornamental
plantings; established ornamental turf; railroad, roadside, and utility
rights-of-ways, and other similar non-crop areas.

>

<>

<D. Cumulative Effects>

<	Pyraflufen-ethyl belongs to the protox inhibitor class of

compounds, and chemically is a 3-phenylpyrazole. The herbicidal

activity of protox inhibitors is due to the inhibition of
protoporphyrinogen IX oxidase. All relevant toxicological data has been
provided to EPA. Chemicals with a similar mode of action, i.e., the
protox inhibitors, have different chemical structures compared to
pyraflufen-ethyl. Although other protox inhibitors have a similar
herbicidal mode of action, there is no information available to suggest
that these compounds exhibit a similar toxicity profile in the mammalian
system. We are aware of no information to indicate or suggest that
pyraflufen-ethyl has any toxic effects on mammals that would be
cumulative with those of any other chemical. Since pyraflufen-ethyl is
relatively non-toxic, cumulative effects of residues and other compounds
are not anticipated. Therefore, for the purposes of this Food Quality
Protection Act (FQPA) document, there should be no consideration of
cumulative risk that would require assessment.

>

<E. Safety Determination>

<U.S. population.

i.  Acute risk. No adverse effect attributable to a single exposure
(dose) of pyraflufen-ethyl was observed in the oral toxicity studies,
including the developmental toxicity studies in rats and rabbits.
Therefore, an acute reference dose was not established and no acute risk
is expected.

ii. Chronic Risk.  Based on the chronic toxicity data, the cPAD for
pyraflufen-ethyl is considered to be 0.172 mg/kg/day. This value is
based on the NOAEL of 17.2 mg/kg/day observed in the chronic rat feeding
study and a safety (uncertainty) factor of 100, the worse case estimate
of chronic dietary exposure of pyraflufen-ethyl from cotton, potatoes,
corn, soybean, and wheat will utilize less than 1% of the cPAD for the
general U.S. population. EPA generally has no concern for exposures
below 100% of the RfD because the RfD represents the level at or below
which daily aggregate dietary exposure over a lifetime will not pose
appreciable risks to human health. The complete and reliable toxicity
data and the conservative chronic exposure assumptions support the
conclusion that there is a reasonable certainty of no harm from dietary
(food) exposure to pyraflufen-ethyl and the acid metabolite residues.
Moreover, as exposure to residues of pyraflufen-ethyl and the acid
metabolite via water is negligible, there is a reasonable certainty of
no harm from aggregate exposure to pyraflufen-ethyl and the acid
metabolite residues.

iii.  Cancer Risk.  Cancer risk was calculated by the EPA in the Federal
Register May 12, 2004 (69 FR 26305) (FRL-7358-2) for both food and
water.  This assessment substantially overstates risk because it is
based on the assumption that all commodities covered by pyraflufen-ethyl
tolerances contain tolerance level residues.  The cancer risk estimate
was in the range of 1 in 1 million and does not exceed the Agency’s
level of concern for exposure from either food or water sources.

>

<	2. Infants and children. The chronic dietary exposure of
pyraflufen-ethyl and the acid metabolite from corn, soybeans, and wheat
will utilize < 1% of the cPAD for children (1-6 years). Exposure to
potential residues in drinking water is expected to be negligible.  In
the Federal Register May 12, 2004 (69 FR 26305) (FRL-7358-2) after
calculating DWLOCs and comparing them to the EECs for surface and ground
water, EPA does not expect the aggregate exposure to children to exceed
the Agency’s level of concern.>

There is no evidence of increased susceptibility of rat or rabbit
fetuses following in utero exposure in the developmental studies with
pyraflufen-ethyl.  There is no evidence of increased susceptibility of
young rats n the reproduction study with Pyraflufen-ethyl.  EPA
concluded there are no residual uncertainties for pre- and/or post-natal
exposure.

<F. International Tolerances>

<	There are no Codex maximum residue level established for residues of
pyraflufen-ethyl and the acid metabolite, E-1, expressed in terms of
parent on any crops.

>

 PAGE

 PAGE   6


[Federal Register: September 23, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 183)]
[Notices]
[Page 48619-48621]
[DOCID:fr23se09-127]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-60679; File No. SR-Phlx-2009-81]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX PHLX, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to
FLEX Option Expirations

September 16, 2009.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\, and Rule 19b-4 \2\ thereunder, notice is hereby given
that on September 15, 2009, NASDAQ OMX PHLX, Inc. (``Phlx'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange.
The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend Phlx Rule 1079 (FLEX Index, Equity
and Currency Options) regarding permissible expiration dates for FLEX
options.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ FLEX options are flexible exchange-traded options contracts
that overly index, equity, and currency securities. FLEX options
provide investors with the ability to customize basic option
features including size, expiration date, exercise style, and
certain exercise prices. FLEX options may have long expiration dates
within five years for FLEX index options and three years for FLEX
equity options and FLEX currency options. See Rule 1079.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://nasdaqomxphlx.cchwallstreet.com/NASDAQOMXPHLX/
Filings/, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the
Commission's Public Reference Room.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

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

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to modify the
permissible expiration dates for FLEX options in Phlx Rule 1079.
    Under current Rule 1079, FLEX options may not expire on any
business day that falls on, or within two business days of an
expiration day for any non-FLEX option on the same underlying security
(an ``Expiration Friday'').\4\ However, subject to aggregation
requirements for cash settled options, the current FLEX rules do permit
the expiration of FLEX options on the same day that non-FLEX quarterly
index options (``QIX'' or ``Quarterly Options'') expire.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ For example, under current Rule 1079, a FLEX option could
expire on the Tuesday before Expiration Friday, but could not expire
on the Wednesday or Thursday before Expiration Friday. Similarly, a
FLEX option could expire on the Wednesday after Expiration Friday,
but could not expire on the Monday or Tuesday after Expiration
Friday. This restriction is hereinafter referred to as the ``three
business day'' expiration restriction.
    \5\ See Rule 1079(a)(6)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange is now proposing to eliminate the expiration date
restriction so that FLEX options may expire on any given business
day.\6\ Although the

expiration date restrictions would be eliminated, the Exchange notes
that all other requirements for FLEX options in Rule 1079 would
continue to apply. FLEX options remain subject to position limits under
Rule 1079(d) and exercise limits under Rule 1079(e). Moreover the
margin requirements in Rule 721 continue to apply and the Exchange has
the authority, pursuant to Rule 1079(d)(2), to impose additional margin
requirements as deemed advisable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Proposed Rule 1079(a)(6) states that the expiration date for
FLEX options is: Any month, business day and year within five years
for FLEX index options and within three years for FLEX currency
options, except that (i) a FLEX index option that expires on or
within two business days prior or subsequent to a third Friday-of-
the-month expiration day for a non-FLEX option (except quarterly
expiring index options) or underlying currency may only have an
exercise settlement value on the expiration date determined by
reference to the reported level of the index as derived from the
opening prices of the component securities (``a.m. settlement'') and
(ii) all FLEX currency options will expire at 11:59 p.m. eastern
time on their designated expiration date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange is also proposing an aggregation requirement under
Rule 1079(d) for position limit purposes. Specifically, for as long as
the options positions remain open, positions in FLEX options that
expire on Expiration Friday shall be aggregated with positions in non-
FLEX options on the same underlying (e.g., the underlying security in
the case of a FLEX equity option, and the underlying index in the case
of a FLEX index option) (referred to as ``comparable non-FLEX
options''). Such FLEX options and comparable non-FLEX options would be
subject to the position and exercise limits that are applicable to the
non-FLEX options.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Position and equity limits for non-FLEX equity, currency,
and index options are governed by Rules 1001, 1002, 1001A, and
1002A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, in the case of FLEX index options only, the proposed
rule change provides that FLEX index options expiring on or within two
business days of an Expiration Friday may not have an exercise
settlement value on the expiration date determined by reference to the
closing price of the index or specified averages. Therefore, the
exercise settlement value on such expiration dates may only be
determined by a.m. settlement values. These limitations on exercise
settlement value calculations are intended to serve as a safeguard
against potential adverse effects that might be associated with triple
witching.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Contracts for stock index futures, stock index options, and
stock options all expire on the same days occurring on the third
Friday of March, June, September, and December (which is referred to
as ``triple witching''). Currency options expire on the same days.
The Exchange's proposed limitations on p.m. exercise settlement
values and exercise settlement values based on a specified average
would apply during triple witching expirations, as well as on all
other Expiration Fridays.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In conjunction with the elimination of the expiration date
restriction, the proposed rule change also states that, provided the
options on an underlying security or index are otherwise eligible for
FLEX trading, FLEX options will be permitted in puts and calls that do
not have the same exercise style, same expiration date and same
exercise price as non-FLEX options that are already available for
trading on the same underlying security or index. The proposed rule
change also provides that FLEX options will be permitted before (but
not after) the options are listed for trading as non-FLEX options. Once
and if an option series is listed for trading as a non-FLEX option
series, then: (i) All existing open positions established under the
FLEX trading procedures shall be fully fungible with transactions in
the respective non-FLEX options series, and (ii) any further trading in
the series would be as non-FLEX options subject to the Exchange's non-
FLEX trading procedures and rules.
    For example, a FLEX trader could establish a FLEX options position
in a European-style, a.m. settled MNX 210 call option series with an
expiration of August 19, 2011 (which will be an Expiration Friday). In
such instance, once and if the non-FLEX, European-style, a.m. settled
MNX 210 call option series that expires on August 19, 2011 is listed
for trading, the established FLEX option position would be fully
fungible with transactions in the non-FLEX option series. Any further
trading in the series would be as non-FLEX options subject to non-FLEX
option trading procedures.
    The Exchange will report any undue effects or unanticipated
consequences that may occur due to the elimination of the three
business day expiration restriction (blackout period).
    The Exchange believes that expanding the eligible dates for FLEX
expirations is important and necessary to the Exchange's efforts to
create a product and market that provides market participants on the
Exchange including investors interested in FLEX-type options with an
improved but comparable alternative to the over-the-counter (``OTC'')
market in customized options, which can take on contract
characteristics similar to FLEX options but are not subject to the same
restrictions (such as the three business day expiration restriction or
the p.m. settlement restriction).\9\ By expanding the eligible
expiration dates for FLEX options, market participants will now have
greater flexibility in determining whether to execute their customized
options in an exchange environment or in the OTC market. The Exchange
believes that market participants benefit from being able to trade
these customized options in an exchange environment in several ways,
including, but not limited to, the following: (1) Enhanced efficiency
in initiating and closing out positions; (2) increased market
transparency; and (3) heightened contra-party creditworthiness because
of the role of The Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'') as issuer and
guarantor of FLEX options.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The Exchange represents that it has appropriate
surveillances in place to monitor transactions in FLEX options.
    \10\ The Exchange also proposes technical changes in Rule 1079
such as, for example, a definitional cross-reference in subsection
(a)(2); updating language to reflect the proper trading system name
and deletion of an obsolete reference to AUTOM in (b); deletion of a
reference to settlement currency in respect of index options because
they settle in U.S. dollars in (b)(1); deletion of position limits
for products that no longer trade on the Exchange in (d)(1); and
deletion of an obsolete rule references (sic) in (d)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act \11\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act \12\ in particular, in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general to protect investors and the public
interest, by providing additional opportunities to trade customized
FLEX options in an exchange environment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \13\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\14\
Because the foregoing rule does not (i) significantly affect the
protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30
days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the
Commission may

designate if consistent with the protection of investors and the public
interest, provided that the self-regulatory organization has given the
Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule
change at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the
proposed rule change or such shorter time as designated by the
Commission,\15\ the proposed rule change has become effective pursuant
to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \16\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
thereunder.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \15\ The Exchange has fulfilled this five day requirement.
    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \17\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) of the Act,\18\ a proposal does not become
operative for 30 days after the date of its filing, or such shorter
time as the Commission may designate if consistent with the protection
of investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day
operative date. The Exchange notes that the proposed rule change is
based on the rules of another self-regulatory organization and raises
no new policy issues.
    The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest,
and thus designates the proposal as operative upon filing.\19\ The
Commission notes that the Exchange's proposal is based on a similar
proposed rule change adopted by the Chicago Board Options Exchange.\20\
That proposal was subject to full notice and comment and no comments
were received. Based on this, the Commission believes that it is
appropriate to designate the proposal operative upon filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ For purposes only of waiving the operative delay of this
proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact
on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f). See also 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(59).
    \20\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59417 (February 18,
2009), 74 FR 8591 (February 25, 2009) (SR-CBOE-2008-115).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-Phlx-2009-81 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 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2009-81. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/
sro.shtml).
    Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the
Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of the filing also will be
available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the
Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the
Commission does not edit personal identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-
Phlx-2009-81 and should be submitted on or before October 14, 2009.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-22877 Filed 9-22-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 180 (Tuesday, September 17, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 57105-57106]
[FR Doc No: 2013-22522]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 73

[Docket No. FDA-2013-C-1008]

Wm. Wrigley Jr. Company; Filing of Color Additive Petition

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of petition.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) is announcing
that we have filed a petition, submitted by the Wm. Wrigley Jr.
Company, proposing that the color additive regulations be amended to
expand the use of synthetic iron oxide to include soft and hard candy,
mints, and chewing gum. The petition also proposes to lower the
specification limit

for lead in synthetic iron oxide for human food use.

DATES: The color additive petition was filed on July 16, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laura A. Dye, Center for Food Safety
and Applied Nutrition (HFS-265), Food and Drug Administration, 5100
Paint Branch Pkwy., College Park, MD 20740-3835,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under section 721(d)(1) of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 379e(d)(1)), notice is given that we
have filed a color additive petition (CAP 3C0298) submitted by the Wm.
Wrigley Jr. Company, c/o Exponent Inc., 1150 Connecticut Ave. NW.,
Suite 1100, Washington, DC 20036. The petition proposes to amend the
color additive regulations in Sec.  73.200 Synthetic iron oxide (21 CFR
73.200) to expand the use of synthetic iron oxide to include soft and
hard candy, mints, and chewing gum. The petition also proposes to lower
the specification limit for lead in synthetic iron oxide for human food
use from 10 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg; 10 parts per million (ppm))
to 5 mg/kg (5 ppm).
    We have determined under 21 CFR 25.32(k) that this action is of a
type that does not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. Therefore, neither an environmental
assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required.

    Dated: September 11, 2013.
Dennis M. Keefe,
Director, Office of Food Additive Safety, Center for Food Safety and
Applied Nutrition.
[FR Doc. 2013-22522 Filed 9-16-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register: September 10, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 175)]
[Notices]
[Page 55341]
[DOCID:fr10se10-67]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2010-0056]

Recovery Policy RP9523.12, Debris Operation--Hand-Loaded Trucks
and Trailers

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is issuing
Recovery Policy RP9523.12, Debris Operation--Hand-Loaded Trucks and
Trailers.

DATES: This policy is effective April 12, 2010.

ADDRESSES: This final policy is available at http://www.regulations.gov
and on FEMA's Web site at http://www.fema.gov. You may also view a hard
copy of the final policy at the Office of Chief Counsel, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, Room 835, 500 C Street, SW., Washington,
DC 20472-3100.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Preston Wilson, Federal Emergency
Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472-3100, 202-
646-1648, or via e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This policy establishes procedures for
reimbursing applicants for eligible debris removal accomplished with
trucks and trailers loaded physically by hand, rather than with
mechanical equipment.
    FEMA previously issued this policy on May 1, 2006. FEMA reviewed
this policy according to the established schedule for FEMA Public
Assistance policies. Therefore, FEMA requested review and comment on
the draft policy in September 2009. FEMA did not receive substantive
comments on the policy. This policy does not implement any major
changes to the previously effective policy dated May 1, 2006. However,
this policy does state that debris monitors should not reduce the
capacity of each hand-loaded truck or trailer for debris types that
mechanical loading methods cannot significantly reduce volumes.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 5121-5207; 44 CFR part 206.

    Dated: August 31, 2010.
David J. Kaufman,
Director, Office of Policy and Program Analysis, Federal Emergency
Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2010-22584 Filed 9-9-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register: June 26, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 124)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 36281-36282]
[DOCID:fr26jn08-11]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 745

[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2005-0049; FRL-8368-9]
RIN 2070-AC83

Small Entity Compliance Guide to Renovate Right: EPA's Lead-Based
Paint Renovation, Repair, and Painting Program; Notice of Availability

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is issuing a notice of availability of its Small Entity
Compliance Guide to Renovate Right: EPA's Lead-Based Paint Renovation,
Repair, and Painting Program (hereinafter referred to as the ``small
entity compliance guide''). This small entity compliance guide is for
contractors, painters, property managers, maintenance personnel, and
other professionals that disturb painted surfaces while working in
homes and child-occupied facilities, such as child care centers and
schools, built before 1978. The small entity compliance guide was
developed by EPA to help small entities comply with the new Lead-Based
Paint Renovation, Repair, and Painting Program requirements published
in the April 22, 2008 Federal Register. This document is published by
the EPA as the official compliance guide for small entities, pursuant
to section 212 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness
Act of 1996 (SBREFA), as amended.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information contact: Colby
Lintner, Regulatory Coordinator, Environmental Assistance Division
(7408M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address: TSCA-
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For technical information contact: Mike Wilson, National Program
Chemicals Division (7404T), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you perform
renovations of target housing or child-occupied facilities for
compensation. ``Target housing'' is defined in section 401 of the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA) as any housing constructed prior to 1978,
except housing for the elderly or persons with disabilities (unless any
child under age 6 resides or is expected to reside in such housing) or
any 0-bedroom dwelling. ``Child-occupied facility'' is defined by the
Lead-Based Paint Renovation, Repair, and Painting Program as a building
or a portion of a building, constructed prior to 1978, visited
regularly by the same child, under 6 years of age, on at least 2
different days within any week (Sunday through Saturday period),
provided that each day's visit lasts at least 3 hours and the combined
weekly visits last at least 6 hours, and the combined annual visits
last at least 60 hours. Child-occupied facilities may be located in
public or commercial buildings or in target housing. The definition of
child-occupied facilities also includes common areas routinely used by
children under age 6 and portions of the exterior that are immediately
adjacent to the child-occupied facility or covered common area.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:
      Building construction (NAICS code 236), e.g., single
family housing construction, multi-family housing construction,
residential remodelers.
     Specialty trade contractors (NAICS code 238), e.g.,
plumbing, heating, and air-conditioning contractors, painting and wall
covering contractors, electrical contractors, finish carpentry
contractors, drywall and insulation contractors, siding contractors,
tile and terrazzo contractors, glass and glazing contractors.
     Real estate (NAICS code 531), e.g., lessors of residential
buildings and dwellings, residential property managers.
     Child day care services (NAICS code 624410).
     Elementary and secondary schools (NAICS code 611110),
e.g., elementary schools with kindergarten classrooms.
     Other technical and trade schools (NAICS code 611519),
e.g., training providers.
     Engineering services (NAICS code 541330) and building
inspection services (NAICS code 541350), e.g., dust sampling
technicians.
    This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to certain entities. To determine
whether you or your business may be affected by this action, you should
carefully examine the applicability provisions in the Lead; Renovation,
Repair, and Painting Program final rule (40 CFR part 745, subpart E).
If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to
a particular entity, consult the technical person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How Can I Get Copies of the Compliance Guide and Other Related
Information?

    1. Docket. EPA has established a docket for this action under
docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2005-0049. All documents
in the docket are listed in the docket's index available at http://
www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain
other material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly
available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are
available electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only
available in hard copy, at the OPPT Docket. The OPPT Docket is located
in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC) at Rm. 3334, EPA West Bldg., 1301
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room
hours of operation are 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding Federal holidays. The telephone number of the EPA/DC Public
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the OPPT
Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Docket visitors are required to show
photographic identification, pass through a metal detector, and sign
the EPA visitor log. All visitor bags are processed through an X-ray
machine and subject to search. Visitors will be provided an EPA/DC
badge that must be visible at all times in the building and returned
upon departure.
    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.
    3. Small entity compliance guide. The small entity compliance guide
is available on EPA's website at http://www.epa.gov/lead/pubs/
renovation and may be reproduced by an individual or corporation
without permission from EPA.

II. Background

    In the Federal Register of April 22, 2008 (73 FR 21692) (FRL-8355-
7), EPA issued the Lead; Renovation, Repair, and Painting Program final
rule (40 CFR part 745, subpart E) that applies to renovations performed
for compensation in target housing and child-occupied facilities built
before 1978 by requiring, among other things:
     Training for renovators.
     Certification of renovators and firms.
     Accreditation of training providers.
     Use of renovation work practice standards, such as posting
warning signs; containing work areas so that no dust or debris leaves
the work area while the renovation is being performed; prohibiting
certain high dust-generating work practices; and a cleanup and cleaning
verification protocol.
    The final rule is effective June 23, 2008. However, certain
provisions of the final rule, such as requiring the use of the work
practices, do not become effective until April 22, 2010.
    EPA examined the economic implications of that final rule as
required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-602). The
Agency concluded that a substantial number of small entities will be
affected by the final rule.
    Pursuant to section 212 of SBREFA (Public Law 104-121, as amended),
EPA is making available a small entity compliance guide, summarizing in
plain language the requirements of the final rule.
    The small entity compliance guide represents the Agency's current
thinking on the subject. It does not create or confer any rights for or
on any person and does not operate to bind EPA or the public.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 745

    Environmental protection, Child-occupied facility, Housing
renovation, Lead, Lead-based paint, Renovation, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: June 20, 2008.
James B. Gulliford,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic
Substances.
[FR Doc. E8-14507 Filed 6-25-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


Relevant Meetings with External Stakeholders since Publication of the 2011 IFR:
September 7, 2011  - Williams & Associates to discuss his comments on the IFR
September 13, 2011  -  David Doniger, NRDC to discuss the IFR and the allocation of HCFC-22
September 16, 2011  -  National Refrigerants to discuss the IFR and allocation of HCFC-22
October 20, 2011  -  Arkema, Inc. to discuss the allocation of HCFC-22
November 10, 2011  -  AGC Chemical to discuss the HCFC phaseout
November 15, 2011  -  DuPont to discuss the allocation of HCFC-22
December 14, 2011  -  Hudson Technologies to discuss the allocation of HCFC-22


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 32 (Wednesday, February 18, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 8639]
[FR Doc No: 2015-03264]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP15-276-000]

MoGas Pipeline LLC; Notice of Technical Conference

    Take notice that a technical conference will be held on Tuesday,
February 24, 2015, at 10:00 a.m. (Eastern Standard Time), in a room to
be designated at the offices of the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (Commission), 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    At the technical conference, the Commission Staff and the parties
to the proceeding should be prepared to discuss all issues set for the
technical conference as established in the January 30, 2015 Order.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ MoGas Pipeline LLC, 150 FERC ] 61,062 (2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FERC conferences are accessible under section 508 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations please
send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll free (866) 208-
3372 (voice) or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY), or send a fax to<PHONE_NUMBER> with
the required accommodations.
    All interested persons are permitted to attend. For further
information please contact Kenneth Witte at<PHONE_NUMBER> or email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
     Dated: February 11, 2015.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-03264 Filed 2-17-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P