COMPANY FEDERAL REGISTER DOCUMENT SUBMISSION TEMPLATE  (1/1/2006)

EPA Registration Division contact: [insert name and telephone number
with area code]

INSTRUCTIONS:  Please utilize this outline in preparing tolerance
petition documents.  In cases where the outline element does not apply
please insert “NA-Remove” and maintain the outline.  The comment
notes that appear on the left margin represent hidden typesetting codes
designed to expedite the processing of the Federal Register document.
Please do not remove or alter these comment notes or change the margins,
font, or format in your document. Simply replace the instructions that
appear in italics and brackets, i.e., “[insert company name],” with
the information specific to your action.]

TEMPLATE:

Bayer CropScience

[Insert petition number]

	EPA has received a pesticide petition ([insert petition number]) from
Bayer CropScience, 2 T.W. Alexander Drive, P.O. Box 12014, Research
Triangle Park, NC  27709 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.

(Options (pick one)

	1. by establishing a tolerance for residues of

	2. to establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for

	  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Cyfluthrin; cyano
(4-fluoro-3-phenoxyphenyl)methyl-3-(2,2-dichloroethenyl)-2,2-dimethyl-cy
clopropanecarboxylate in or on the raw agricultural commodity grain,
cereal, group 15 (except Rice) at 4.0 parts per million (ppm), grain,
cereal, forage, fodder and straw, group 16 (except Rice) at 7.0 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
the 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.    SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 The metabolism of
cyfluthrin in plants is adequately understood. Studies have been
conducted to delineate the metabolism of radiolabeled cyfluthrin in
various crops all showing similar results. The residue of concern is
cyfluthrin.

	2. Analytical method.   SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Adequate analytical
methodology using GC/EC detection is available for enforcement purposes.

	3. Magnitude of residues.  Residue trials necessary for setting group
tolerances for groups 15 and 16 (except rice) were previously submitted
and were reviewed by EPA. No new or additional studies are required or
were performed.  The respective residue trials were conducted in sorghum
(MRID No.: 42433001, 42433003, 43567303, 43567307), wheat (MRID No.:
No.: 43567301, 43567305, 45655802, 45655805, 45655806), and corn (MRID
No.: 42005488, 42005489, 42005490, 42005491, 42005496, 42005497,
43567302, 43567306, 44629605, 44665701, 44815305, 46661501).

B. Toxicological Profile

	1. Acute toxicity.    SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 There is a full battery of
acute toxicity studies for cyfluthrin supporting an overall toxicity
Category II for the active ingredient.

	2. Genotoxicty.   SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Based on the results of a
complete genotoxicity database, there is no evidence of mutagenicity
activity in a battery of studies, including several gene mutation assays
(reverse mutation and recombination assays in bacteria and a Chinese
hamster ovary(CHO)/HGPRT assay), a structural chromosome aberration
assay (CHO/sister chromatid exchange assay), and an unscheduled DNA
synthesis assay in rat hepatocytes. All tests were negative for
genotoxicity.

	3. Reproductive and developmental toxicity.   SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 A
developmental toxicity study in rats with beta-cyfluthrin indicated a
maternal NOAEL of 3 mg/kg bw/day based on reduced body weight gain and
food consumption at 10 mg/kg bw/day.  The developmental NOAEL was 10
mg/kg bw/day, based on reduced fetal body weights and increased skeletal
variations at the maternally toxic dose of 40 mg/kg bw/day.   An oral
developmental toxicity study in rabbits with cyfluthrin indicated a
maternal NOAEL of 20 mg/kg bw/day and a maternal LOAEL of 60 mg/kg
bw/day, based on decreased body weight gain and decreased food
consumption during the dosing period. A fetal NOAEL of greater than 180
mg/kg bw/day was also observed in this study.   A two-generation
reproduction study in rats indicated parental and offspring NOAELs of
3.0 mg/kg bw/day, based on reductions in body weight and food
consumption in the parents and course tremors and decreased mean litter
weights in the offspring at 9.0 mg/kg bw/day.  The NOAELs were confirmed
in a supplemental two-generation study.

	4. Subchronic toxicity.    SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1  In a 90-day feeding
study in rats with beta-cyfluthrin the resulting NOAEL was 9.5 mg/kg
bw/day, based on decreased body weight gain, gait abnormalities, skin
lesions and mortality seen at 37.5 mg/kg bw/day.   A six-month toxicity
feeding study in dogs established a NOAEL of 5 mg/kg bw/day for
cyfluthrin.  The LOAEL was 15 mg/kg bw/day based on clinical signs of
neurotoxicity and gastrointestinal disturbances.

Two subchronic inhalation studies were conducted with cyfluthrin.  In
the first study cyfluthrin was administered via inhalation for five days
per week for 4 weeks.  The resulting NOAEL was 0.44 mg/m3, based on
treatment-related behavioral effects, body weight decreases and clinical
chemistry changes at 6.0 mg/m3.  In the second study cyfluthrin was
administered via inhalation for 13 weeks.  The resulting NOAEL was 0.09
mg/m3, based treatment-related behavioral effects in females and
increased urinary protein in males at 0.71 mg/m3.

	5. Neurotoxicity.    SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 An acute neurotoxicity study
in rats was conducted using beta-cyfluthrin.  The NOAEL for this study
is 2 mg/kg, based on clinical signs, changes in FOB parameters and
decreases in motor activity noted at 10 mg/kg.  In a subchronic
neurotoxicity study with beta-cyfluthrin the resulting NOAEL was
8 mg/kg, based on clinical signs, changes in FOB parameters, and
slightly decreased body weight gain and food consumption at 27
mg/kg/day.  In a developmental neurotoxicity study with beta-cyfluthrin
the resulting maternal and offspring NOAEL was 11.0 mg/kg body
weight/day based on decreased body weight and a change in startle
response in PND 22 male pups.  The database for cyfluthrin is complete
and there is no indication of pre- or post-natal susceptibility.  There
is no indication of delayed neurotoxicity as a result of exposure to
cyfluthrin.

	6. Chronic toxicity.    SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 A 12-month chronic feeding
study in dogs established a no-observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) of
2.4 mg/kg bw/day (males) and 3.6 mg/kg bw/day (females). The lowest
effect level (LOAEL) for this study is established at 11 mg/kg bw/day,
clinical signs, gait abnormalities and abnormal postural reactions in
males and females.  A 24-month chronic feeding/ carcinogenicity study in
rats demonstrated a NOAEL of 2.6 mg/kg bw/day and LOAEL of 11.6 mg/kg
bw/day, based on decreased body weights.  A 24-month carcinogenicity
study in mice was conducted.  The NOAEL was 31.9 (males) and 140.6
(females) mg/kg/bw/day.  The LOAEL was 114.8 mg/kg bw/day (males) based
on ear skin lesions and reduced body weight gains, and 309.7 mg/kg
bw/day (females) based on clinical signs, macroscopic and microscopic
pathology findings and reduced body weights, body weight gains, and food
consumption. Under the conditions of these studies, there was no
evidence of carcinogenic potential.

	7. Animal metabolism.    SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 A metabolism study in rats
showed that cyfluthrin is rapidly absorbed and excreted, mostly as
conjugated metabolites in the urine, within 48 hours. An enterohepatic
circulation was observed.

	8. Metabolite toxicology.   SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 The residue of concern
is cyfluthrin.  No toxicology data have been required for cyfluthrin
metabolites. Available data indicate that the metabolites are much less
toxic than the parent and are not of concern.

	9. Endocrine disruption.   SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 There is no evidence of
endocrine effects in any of the studies conducted with cyfluthrin, thus,
there is no indication at this time that cyfluthrin causes endocrine
effects.

C. Aggregate Exposure

	1. Dietary exposure.     SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 The insecticide cyfluthrin
has uses on food crops in agriculture and also non-dietary uses for
homeowners.  Aggregate exposure for cyfluthrin should consider dietary
exposure, both food and drinking water and non-dietary exposure both
applicator and post application exposure.  For the dietary exposure an
acute Population Adjusted Dose (aPAD) of 0.02 mg/kg bw/day was selected
using an uncertainty factor of 100 based on the acute neurotoxicity
study.  A chronic Population Adjusted Dose (cPAD) of 0.024 mg/kg bw/day
was based on the chronic toxicity test in dogs with an uncertainty
factor of 100.

	i. Food.    SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Chronic and acute dietary exposure
estimates resulting from the above listed proposed use and the
registered uses of cyfluthrin are well within acceptable limits for all
sectors of the population.  Potential dietary exposures from food were
estimated using the DEEM™ software system (Exponent, Inc.) and the
1994-96 and 1998 USDA consumption data. For the chronic analysis, mean
residue values were calculated from the appropriate field trial studies
conducted for cyfluthrin and submitted as part of the cyfluthrin
petitions.  For the acute analysis, the entire distribution of field
trial residue values was used for non-blended and partially blended
commodities and the mean value used for blended commodities.  Processing
factors were obtained from GLP processing studies for the appropriate
commodities.  Percent crop treated values were based on EPA’s dietary
risk assessments (15-Aug-02) and on Bayer CropScience projections for
crops added since then.  For the crops from grain groups 15 and 16
(barley, buckwheat, millet, oats, rye, and triticale) 100 % crop treated
was assumed. Using these data and assumptions for the acute analysis the
most highly exposed sub-population was All Infants at 89 %
(0.0178 mg/kg bw/day for food incl. drinking water) of the acute PAD
with the US Population at 45 % (0.009 mg/kg bw/day for food incl.
drinking water) of the acute PAD.  For the chronic analysis, the most
highly exposed sub-population was Children 1-2 utilizing 19.4 % (0.0047
mg/kg bw/day for food incl. drinking water) of the chronic PAD.  The US
Population utilized 5.6 % (0.0013 mg/kg bw/day for food incl. drinking
water) of the chronic PAD.  Actual exposures are likely to be much less
because of the many conservative assumptions incorporated in this
analysis.

	ii. Drinking Water.  The estimated drinking water concentration was
taken form   SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 US EPA’s calculation of the drinking
water estimated environmental concentrations (EEC) for cyfluthrin
published in the Federal Register (FR Vol 70, no. 176, 13-Sep-05). These
EECs were directly incorporated into the calculation of the dietary
exposure.

	2. Non-dietary exposure.    SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Non-occupational
exposure to cyfluthrin may occur as a result of inhalation or contact
from indoor residential, indoor commercial and outdoor residential uses.
 Pursuant to the requirements of FIFRA as amended by the Food Quality
Protection Act of 1996 non-dietary and aggregate risk analyses for
cyfluthrin were conducted.  The analyses include evaluation of potential
non-dietary acute application and post-application exposures.
Non-occupational, non-dietary exposure was assessed based on the
assumption that a flea infestation control scenario represents a
“worst case” scenario.  For the flea control infestation scenario
indoor fogger, and professional residential turf same day treatments
were included for cyfluthrin.  Deterministic (point values) were used to
present a worse case upper-bound estimate of non-dietary exposure.  The
non-dietary exposure estimates were expressed as systemic absorbed doses
for a summation of inhalation, dermal and incidental ingestion
exposures.  These worst-case non-dietary exposures were aggregated with
chronic dietary exposures to evaluate potential health risks that might
be associated with cyfluthrin products.  The chronic dietary exposures
were expressed as an oral absorbed dose to combine with the non-dietary
systemic absorbed doses for comparison to a systemic absorbed dose
no-observed-effect-level (NOEL).  Results for each potential exposed
subpopulation (of adults, children 1-6 years, and infants <1 year) were
compared to the systemic absorbed dose NOEL for cyfluthrin to provide
estimates of margins of exposure (MOE).  The large MOEs for cyfluthrin
clearly demonstrate a substantial degree of safety.  The total
non-dietary MOEs are 3800, 2700, and 2500 for adults, children (1-6
years), and infants (<1 year), respectively.  The non-dietary methods
used in the analyses can be characterized as highly conservative due to
the conservatism inherent in the calculation procedures and input
assumptions.  An example of this is the conservatism inherent in the
jazzercise methodology’s over-representation of residential
post-application exposures.  Therefore, it can be concluded that large
MOEs associated with potential non-dietary and aggregate exposures to
cyfluthrin will result in little or no health risks to exposed persons.

D. Cumulative Effects

	  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Cyfluthrin is a member of the pyrethroid class of
pesticides. EPA is not currently following a cumulative risk approach
based on a common mechanism of toxicity for the pyrethroids while
research on this subject is still ongoing (FR Vol. 70, No. 176,
13-Sep-05).

E. Safety Determination

	1. U.S. population.    SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Using the assumptions and
data described above, based on the completeness and reliability of the
toxicity data, it is concluded that chronic dietary exposure to the
registered and proposed uses of cyfluthrin will utilize at most 5.6 % of
the chronic PAD for the US Population.  The acute dietary exposure to
cyfluthrin will utilize at most 45 % of the acute PAD.  The actual
exposure both acute and chronic is likely to be much less as more
realistic data and models are developed.  EPA generally has no concern
for exposures below 100% of the PAD because the PAD represents the level
at or below which daily aggregate exposure over a lifetime will not pose
appreciable risk to human health.   Potential exposure from drinking
water was included in the calculations.  Large margins of safety exist
for the non-dietary and aggregate exposure.  Therefore, there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will occur to the US Population from
aggregate exposure (food, drinking water and non-dietary) to residues of
cyfluthrin.

	2. Infants and children.    SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 The relevant toxicity
studies as discussed in the toxicology section above show no extra
sensitivity of infants and children to cyfluthrin, therefore the FQPA
safety factor can be removed. Using the assumptions and data described
in the exposure section above, the percent of the chronic PAD that will
be used for exposure to residues of cyfluthrin in food for Children 1-2
(the most highly exposed sub-population) is 19.4 %.  Infants utilize 5.5
% of the chronic PAD.  For the acute assessment children 1-2 utilize 84
% of the acute PAD and Infants utilize 89 % of the acute PAD.  As in
the adult situation, drinking water exposure was included in the
calculation of the PAD.  As with adults, large margins of safety exist
for the non-dietary and aggregate exposure for infants and children.
Therefore, there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will occur to
infants and children from aggregate exposure to residues of cyfluthrin.

F. International Tolerances

	Cyfluthrin is a broad spectrum insecticide used throughout the world to
control pests in crop and non-crop use areas.  CODEX MRL exist for
cyfluthrin for apples at 0.5 ppm, cattle milk at 0.01 ppm, cotton seed
at 0.05 ppm, maize at 0.05 ppm, peppers, sweet at 0.2 ppm, rape seed at
0.05 ppm and tomatoes at 0.5 ppm.  There is no existing international
tolerance for the proposed new use.


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 26 (Friday, February 7, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 7410-7412]
[FR Doc No: 2014-02701]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2009-0805; FRL-9906-32-Region 5]

Approval of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Indiana; Ohio;
``Infrastructure'' SIP State Board Requirements for the 2006 24-Hour
PM2.5 NAAQS

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: Under the Clean Air Act (CAA), the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve elements of state implementation
plan (SIP) submissions by the Indiana Department of Environmental

Management (IDEM) and the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (Ohio
EPA) to address the section 110 requirements of the CAA for the 2006
24-hour fine particle national ambient air quality standards (2006
PM2.5 NAAQS). The SIPs under section 110 of the CAA are
often referred to as the ``infrastructure'' SIP, and specifically we
are proposing approval of portions of these states' submissions
intended to meet the state board requirements of section 110. This
section requires states to comply with the applicable state board
requirements found in section 128 of the CAA.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 10, 2014.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2009-0805, by one of the following methods:
    1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    2. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    4. Mail: Douglas Aburano, Chief, Attainment Planning and
Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
    5. Hand Delivery: Douglas Aburano, Chief, Attainment Planning and
Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office normal
hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information. The Regional Office official hours of
business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding
Federal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID. EPA-R05-OAR-2009-
0805. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in
the public docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment
directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is open from
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal
holidays. We recommend that you telephone Andy Chang, Environmental
Engineer, at<PHONE_NUMBER> before visiting the Region 5 office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andy Chang, Environmental Engineer,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-
18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:

I. What is the background for this action?
II. What is the result of EPA's review of the applicable state board
requirements for Indiana and Ohio?
III. What action is EPA taking?
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What is the background for this action?

    Under sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA, and implementing EPA
policy, states are required to submit to EPA infrastructure SIPs to
ensure that their SIPs provide for implementation, maintenance, and
enforcement of the NAAQS, including the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.
These submissions must contain any revisions needed for meeting the
applicable SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2), or certifications
that their existing SIPs already met those requirements.
    EPA highlighted this statutory requirement in an October 2, 2007,
guidance document entitled ``Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under
Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997 8-hour Ozone and
PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards'' (2007 Memo).
On September 25, 2009, EPA issued additional guidance pertaining to the
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS entitled ``Guidance on SIP Elements
Required Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2006 24-Hour Fine
Particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS)'' (2009 Memo).
    On October 29, 2012, EPA finalized its approval of the majority of
the infrastructure SIP elements for Indiana and Ohio with respect to
the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS (see 77 FR 65478). However, we took no
action on the state board requirements of section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii);
instead, we committed to address compliance with these requirements at
a later time (see 77 FR 65478 at 75480). Today's proposed rulemaking
and future final action are intended to fulfill that commitment.
    To assist states with addressing the state board requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii), EPA issued ``Guidance on infrastructure SIP
Elements Required Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2008 Lead
(Pb) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)'' (2011 Memo) and
most recently, ``Guidance on Infrastructure SIP Elements under Clean
Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2)'' (2013 Memo). Notably, the
2013 Memo specifies that the state board requirements are not NAAQS
specific, i.e., the requirements are identical for each NAAQS. Today's
rulemaking describes how Indiana and Ohio have met the applicable state
board requirements under section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS; this rulemaking does not address any other
NAAQS, nor does it extend to any other infrastructure SIP element of
the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.

II. What is the result of EPA's review of the applicable state board
requirements for Indiana and Ohio?

    Integral to the infrastructure SIP requirements for IDEM and Ohio
EPA with respect to the state board requirements for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS was the need for these two states to show that
they had met the applicable

requirements contained in section 128 of the CAA, and for the states to
submit such provisions for incorporation into the SIP.
    Under section 128 of the CAA, each SIP must contain provisions that
address two requirements: (i) That any board or body which approves
permits or enforcement orders under this chapter shall have at least a
majority of members who represent the public interest and do not derive
any significant portion of their income from persons subject to permits
and enforcement orders under this chapter, and (ii) that any potential
conflicts of interest by members of such board or body or the head of
an executive agency with similar powers be adequately disclosed. IDEM's
and Ohio EPA's satisfaction of these requirements follow, below.
    On August 19, 2013, EPA proposed approval of IDEM's provisions
intended to address the applicable requirements of section 128 (see 78
FR 50360). No comments were received regarding our proposed approval of
Indiana's state board provisions, and EPA's final approval of these
provisions was published on December 24, 2013 (see 78 FR 77599). IDEM
had previously requested in a May 22, 2013, SIP submission that EPA's
approval of its state board provisions satisfy any applicable
infrastructure SIP requirements for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.
EPA therefore proposes that Indiana has met the section
110(a)(2)(E)(ii) requirements for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.
    On June 7, 2013, Ohio submitted a SIP revision clarifying that the
state does not have a board that has the authority to approve
enforcement orders or permitting actions as outlined in section
128(a)(1) of the CAA; instead, this authority rests with the Director
of Ohio EPA. Therefore, section 128(a)(1) of the CAA is not applicable
in Ohio.
    Under section 128(a)(2), the head of the executive agency with the
power to approve enforcement orders or permits must adequately disclose
any potential conflicts of interest. In its June 7, 2013, submission,
Ohio EPA noted that EPA has previously approved provisions into Ohio's
SIP addressing these requirements (see 46 FR 57490). Specifically, ORC
102: Public Officers--Ethics contains provisions that require the
Director of Ohio EPA (and his/her delegate) to file an annual statement
with the ethics committee including potential conflicts of interest;
furthermore, this annual filing is subject to public inspection. Ohio
EPA requested in its June 7, 2013, submission that these SIP-approved
provisions satisfy any applicable infrastructure SIP requirements for
the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA therefore proposes that Ohio has
met the applicable requirements for section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) for the
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.

III. What action is EPA taking?

    For the reasons discussed above, EPA is proposing to approve
submissions from IDEM and Ohio intended to address the state board
requirements under section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS. To reiterate, this action does not extend to
any other NAAQS, nor does it extend to any other element under section
110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves State law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by State
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this rule does not have Tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the State, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on Tribal governments or preempt Tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Particulate Matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    Dated: January 22, 2014.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2014-02701 Filed 2-6-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 87 (Monday, May 6, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19774-19775]
[FR Doc No: 2019-09196]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RM98-1-000]

Records Governing Off-the-Record Communications; Public Notice

    This constitutes notice, in accordance with 18 CFR 385.2201(b), of
the receipt of prohibited and exempt off-the-record communications.
    Order No. 607 (64 FR 51222, September 22, 1999) requires Commission
decisional employees, who make or receive a prohibited or exempt off-
the-record communication relevant to the merits of a contested
proceeding, to deliver to the Secretary of the Commission, a copy of
the communication, if written, or a summary of the substance of any
oral communication.
    Prohibited communications are included in a public, non-decisional
file associated with, but not a part of, the decisional record of the
proceeding. Unless the Commission determines that the prohibited
communication and any responses thereto should become a part of the
decisional record, the prohibited off-the-record communication will not
be considered by the Commission in reaching its decision. Parties to a
proceeding may seek the opportunity to respond to any facts or
contentions made in a prohibited off-the-record communication, and may
request that the Commission place the prohibited communication and
responses thereto in the decisional record. The Commission will grant
such a request

only when it determines that fairness so requires. Any person
identified below as having made a prohibited off-the-record
communication shall serve the document on all parties listed on the
official service list for the applicable proceeding in accordance with
Rule 2010, 18 CFR 385.2010.
    Exempt off-the-record communications are included in the decisional
record of the proceeding, unless the communication was with a
cooperating agency as described by 40 CFR 1501.6, made under 18 CFR
385.2201(e) (1) (v).
    The following is a list of off-the-record communications recently
received by the Secretary of the Commission. The communications listed
are grouped by docket numbers in ascending order. These filings are
available for electronic review at the Commission in the Public
Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's website at http://www.ferc.gov using the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number,
excluding the last three digits, in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Docket Nos.               File date     Presenter or requester
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               Prohibited:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. CP17-495-000................       4/17/2019  FERC Staff.\1\
2. CP18-46-000.................       4/17/2019  FERC Staff.\2\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 Exempt:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. CP17-495-000................       4/12/2019  U.S. Congress.\3\
2. CP17-495-000................       4/18/2019  U.S. House of
                                                  Representative Ken
                                                  Buck.
3. CP17-495-000................       4/18/2019  U.S. House of
                                                  Representative Scott
                                                  Tipton.
4. CP17-495-000................       4/18/2019  U.S. Senator John
                                                  Barrasso, M.D.
5. CP17-495-000................       4/19/2019  U.S. House of
                                                  Representative Liz
                                                  Cheney.
6. CP17-495-000................       4/19/2019  Oregon House of
                                                  Representative Caddy
                                                  McKeown.
7. CP17-495-000................       4/19/2019  Oregon House of
                                                  Representative Gary
                                                  Leif.
8. CP17-495-000................       4/19/2019  Oregon State Senator
                                                  Dennis Linthicum.
9. CP17-495-000................       4/19/2019  Oregon State Senator
                                                  Arnie Roblan.
10. CP17-495-000...............       4/19/2019  Oregon House of
                                                  Representative E.
                                                  Werner Reschke.
11. CP17-495-000...............       4/19/2019  Oregon House of
                                                  Representative David
                                                  Brock Smith.
12. CP17-495-000...............       4/19/2019  Oregon State Senator
                                                  Dallas Heard.
13. CP15-115-000...............       4/23/2019  Seneca Nation of
                                                  Indians.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    \1\ Email correspondence dated 4/16/2019 with Debra New of North
Bend, OR.
    \2\ Email correspondence dated 4/16/2019 with Rose Merrigan, Tom
Cuce, and Neighbors of Bucks County, PA, West Rockhill Township.
    \3\ Senator Ron Wyden and Representative Peter DeFazio.

    Dated: April 30, 2019.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-09196 Filed 5-3-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

	OFFICE OF PREVENTION, PESTICIDES

                   AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 MEMORANDUM

Date:  		12/JUN/2009

SUBJECT:	Pyrimethanil;  Amended: Section 3 Registration Request to
Register New Postharvest Uses on Stone Fruit, Crop Group 12 and a
Preharvest Use on Lemon.  Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue
Data.

PC Code:  288201	DP Barcode:   D366080

Decision No.: 393117	Registration No.: 400-168

Petition No.: 8E7353	Regulatory Action:  Section 3 Registration

Risk Assessment Type:  NA	Case No.:  NA

TXR No.:  NA	CAS No.:  70852-53-8

MRID No.:  NA	40 CFR:  40 CFR §180.231

FROM:	Debra Rate, Ph.D., Biologist

		Alternative Risk Integration and Assessment (ARIA) Team

		Risk Integration, Minor Use and Emergency Response Branch (RIMUERB)

		Registration Division (RD) (7505P)

THROUGH:	John Redden, Team Leader

		ARIA/RIMUERB/RD (7505P)

AND

			George F. Kramer, Ph.D., Senior Chemist

Risk Assessment Branch 1 (RAB1)

			Health Effects Division (HED; 7509P)

TO:	Susan Stanton, Environmental Specialist

	IR-4 Team/RIMUERB/RD (7505P)

		  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1   SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1

Upon reconsideration, ARIA, in consultation with RAB1, ChemSAC, and OGC,
has determined that changes are required for the previous memorandum,
DP# 361301, D. Rate, 05/MAR/2009.

In order to remain in compliance with CFR40 §180.1(h), ARIA has
recommended for revisions to the previous recommendations in DP# 361301
(D. Rate, 05/MAR/2009).  The following amendments to tolerance
recommendations will have no negative impact on dietary (acute and
chronic) risk and, in fact, the recent human health risk assessment (DP#
353181, D. Rate, 25/MAR/2009) can be considered to be more conservative
with the amended recommendations.

The purpose of this memorandum is to make revisions to the conclusion,
regulatory recommendations, residue chemistry deficiencies and proposed
tolerance sections of DP# 361301.

No changes in the original document other than those explicitly set
forth here are necessary.

I.	 CONCLUSIONS

Regulatory Recommendations

Provided that a revised Section B, label (see requirements under
Directions for Use) and Section F (see requirements under Proposed
Tolerances) are submitted in addition to the submission of analytical
reference standards to replace expired samples; there are no residue
chemistry issues that would preclude granting a registration for uses of
pyrimethanil (Penbotec® 400SC (EPA Reg. No. 43813-32-2792) and Scala®
SC (EPA Reg. No. 264-788)) on stone fruit and citrus fruit.  ARIA
recommends for the following permanent tolerances:

Fruit, stone, group 12	10 ppm

Fruit, citrus, group 10, except lemon, postharvest    	10 ppm

Lemon, preharvest and postharvest	11 ppm

ARIA recommends for the removal of the following tolerances
concomitantly with the establishment of the above tolerances:

Fruit, stone (except cherry), group 12	3.0 ppm

Fruit, citrus group 10 (postharvest)	10 ppm

Residue Chemistry Deficiencies

860.1200 Directions for Use

The label should be revised to prohibit the use of adjuvants with
Scala® SC in the preharvest treatment of lemons.  The submitted label
for Penbotec® 400SC states that stone fruit can be treated by high
volume spray, drench or dip; however, only stone fruit (except cherries)
may be treated with low-volume spray.  A revised Section B should be
submitted which accurately reflects the field trial data and label
instructions for both products.

860.1550 Proposed Tolerances

A summary of the recommended tolerances along with recommendations for
commodity definitions are presented in Table 9.  The petitioner should
submit a revised Section F to reflect these tolerance and commodity
definitions.

860.1650 Submittal of Analytical Reference Standards

The petitioner should submit new analytical standards for pyrimethanil,
to replace the expired samples.

860.1500 Crop Field Trials

Lemon

47425604.der.doc, D. Rate, 03/NOV/2008. (Lemon)

Table 4.  Summary of Residue Data from Crop Field Trials with
Pyrimethanil.

Commodity	Total Applic. Rate

 (lb ai/A)	PHI

(days)	Sample size (n)	Residue Levels (ppm)

Min.	Max.	HAFT*	Median	Mean	Std. Dev.

Lemon	0.690 – 0.817	7	10	0.068	0.31	0.27	0.22	0.20	0.080

*HAFT = Highest Average Field Trial

IR-4 submitted field trial data to support the establishment of a
tolerance for residue of pyrimethanil in or on lemon.  Five field trials
were conducted for this study during the 2004 – 2005 growing season in
CA (Region 10).  At each trial, one foliar air blast application of
Scala( SC (54.6 % pyrimethanil) with no adjuvants or additives was made
at a rate of approximately 0.70 lb ai/A.  Mature lemons were harvested 7
days after the application.

Residues of pyrimethanil were analyzed in the IR-4 Western Region
Laboratory, Davis, CA.  The procedure used for the analysis was derived
from the AgrEvo UK Limited method 140/01/012, “Fruit and Vegetables:
Analytical Method for the Determination of Residues (Improved Version),
Pyrimethanil, Active Substance.”  Pyrimethanil residues in lemon were
extracted by homogenization with acetone.  An aliquot of the extract was
acidified then washed with hexane before adding base to enable solvent
partition.  Final clean-up was by silica SPE, with determination by
GC/MSD.

Based on recoveries of samples fortified at the LLMV, 0.05 ppm, the LOD
and LOQ were calculated as 0.017 ppm and 0.052 ppm, respectively.  No
residue decline data was submitted.

Conclusions:  In combination with previously reviewed data and the
established tolerance of 10 ppm for postharvest treatment of citrus
fruit, ARIA recommends for a tolerance in/on fruit, citrus, group 10,
except lemon, postharvest at 10 ppm and a tolerance in/on lemon,
preharvest and postharvest at 11 ppm.  Concomitant with the
establishment of the recommended tolerance, ARIA recommends for the
removal of the current 10 ppm tolerance on fruit, citrus, group 10
(postharvest).

860.1550 Proposed Tolerances

The Agency has determined that the residue of concern for the purpose of
tolerance expression in plants is parent only.  The residues of concern
for tolerance expression in ruminant tissues are parent + Metabolite
AEC614276, and for milk are parent + Metabolite AEC614277; see Figure 1
(Attachment 1) for chemical names and structures of these regulated
compounds.  The tolerance expressions proposed by the petitioner in its
submission of Section F are consistent with the tolerance definitions
for pyrimethanil in 40 CFR §180.518.

A summary of the recommended tolerances for the commodities addressed in
the current petition is listed in Table 9.

The recommended tolerance of 10 ppm for stone fruits (crop group 12) is
adequate and is supported by the submitted residue data.  When the
maximum residues from all routes of pyrimethanil exposure to stone
fruits (crop group 12) are considered (i.e., postharvest by high-volume
spray, drench or dip, or low-volume spray + preharvest application), the
total residues (ppm) are expected to be below the recommended tolerance.

The proposed tolerance of 10 ppm in/on fruit, citrus, group10, except
lemon, postharvest is adequate and is supported by previously reviewed
residue data reflecting the proposed use pattern (DP#   SEQ CHAPTER \h
\r 1 284001 and 284870,   SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 J. Morales and   SEQ
CHAPTER \h \r 1 G. Kramer,   SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 12/JAN/2004).  The
proposed tolerance in/on lemon, preharvest and postharvest at 11 ppm is
also supported by previously reviewed data in combination with the
submitted studies.  Thus, ARIA recommends to establish the proposed
tolerances.

Codex maximum residue limits (MRLs) have been established for
pyrimethanil per se in/on plant commodities.  Codex MRLs are listed for
citrus fruit at 7 ppm (postharvest); cherry (postharvest), peach and
nectarine at 4 ppm; apricot at 3 ppm; and plum at 2 ppm.  Presumably due
to differences in application and use patterns, harmonization is not
feasible at this time.

A Canadian MRL for citrus fruit (Calamondins, citrus citron, citrus
hybrids, grapefruits, kumquats, lemons, limes, oranges, pummelos,
satsuma mandarins, tangerines) is established at 10 ppm and for stone
fruit (apricots,  nectarines, peaches, plumcots, plums, prune plums)
established at 3 ppm.  There are no Mexican MRLs established for
residues of pyrimethanil in commodities associated with this review.

An International Residue Limit (IRL) form is appended to this Summary
Document and follows this section.

Table 9.  Tolerance Summary for Pyrimethanil.

Commodity	Proposed / Established Tolerance (ppm)	Recommended Tolerance
(ppm)	Comments; Correct Commodity Definition

40 CFR §180.518 (a)(1)

Stone Fruits (Crop Group 12) 	10	10	Fruit, stone, group 12

Fruit, citrus (except lemon), group 10 (postharvest)		10	10	Fruit,
citrus, group 10, except lemon, postharvest

Lemon	11	11	Lemon, preharvest  and postharvest

Fruit, stone (except cherry), group 12	3.0	Remove

	Fruit, citrus, group 10 (postharvest)	10	Remove

Page   PAGE  1  of   NUMPAGES  5


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 125 (Monday, June 30, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36851-36853]
[FR Doc No: 2014-15200]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-72453; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2014-68]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Reflect Changes
to the Name of, and the Means of Seeking the Investment Objective
Applicable to, the PIMCO Real Return Exchange-Traded Fund

June 24, 2014.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby given
that, on June 12, 2014, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``Exchange'' or ``NYSE Arca'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items
have been prepared by the self-regulatory organization. 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\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 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 reflect changes to the name of, and the
means of seeking the investment objective applicable to, the PIMCO Real
Return Exchange-Traded Fund (the ``Fund''). The Commission has approved
the listing and trading of shares of the Fund on the Exchange under
NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.600. Shares of the Fund have not yet
commenced trading on the Exchange. The text of the proposed rule change
is available on the Exchange's Web site at www.nyse.com, 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 self-regulatory organization
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 those 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 parts of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Commission has approved listing and trading on the Exchange of
shares (``Shares'') of the PIMCO Real Return Exchange-Traded Fund
(``Fund''), which are offered by PIMCO ETF Trust (the ``Trust''),\4\
under NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.600, which governs the listing and
trading of Managed Fund Shares. The Shares of the Fund have not yet
commenced trading on the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 71125 (December 18,
2013), 78 FR 77743 (December 24, 2013) (SR-NYSEArca-2013-106) (order
approving listing and trading on the Exchange of the PIMCO
Diversified Income Exchange-Traded Fund, PIMCO Real Return Exchange-
Traded Fund, and PIMCO Low Duration Exchange-Traded Fund) (``Prior
Order''). See also Securities Exchange Act Release No. 70774
(October 30, 2013), 78 FR 66396 (November 5, 2013) (SR-NYSEArca-
2013-106) (``Prior Notice,'' and together with the Prior Order, the
``Prior Release'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Shares are offered by the Trust, a statutory trust organized
under the laws of the State of Delaware and registered with the
Commission as an open-end management investment company.\5\ The
investment manager to the Fund is Pacific Investment Management Company
LLC (``PIMCO'' or the ``Adviser'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Trust is registered under the Investment Company Act of
1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a-1) (``1940 Act''). On October 31, 2013, the
Trust filed with the Commission an amendment to its registration
statement on Form N-1A under the Securities Act of 1933 (15 U.S.C.
77a) (``Securities Act''), and under the 1940 Act relating to the
Fund (File Nos. 333-155395 and 811-22250) (``Registration
Statement''). The description of the operation of the Trust and the
Fund herein is based, in part, on the Registration Statement. In
addition, the Commission has issued an order granting certain
exemptive relief to the Trust under the 1940 Act. See Investment
Company Act Release No. 28993 (File No. 812-13571) (``Exemptive
Order'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In this proposed rule change, the Exchange proposes to reflect
changes to the name of the Fund and to the description of the
investments the Adviser will utilize in seeking the Fund's investment
objective, as described below.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The changes described herein will be effective upon filing
with the Commission of a supplement to the Trust's Registration
Statement. See note 5, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Adviser proposes that the name of the Fund be changed from that
stated in the Prior Release to the PIMCO Inflation-Linked Active
Exchange-Traded Fund. The Adviser represents that it is changing the
name of the Fund to better reflect the nature of the Fund's revised
investment strategy.
    In addition, the Adviser proposes that the Fund may invest up to
20% of its total assets in securities and instruments that are
economically tied to emerging market countries, subject to the Fund's
investment limitations relating to particular asset classes set forth
in the Prior Release.\7\ The Prior Release stated that the Fund may
invest up to 10% of its total assets in securities and instruments that
are economically tied to emerging market countries, subject to the
Fund's investment limitations relating to particular asset classes set
forth in the Prior Release.\8\ The Adviser represents that the proposed
increase in the Fund's total assets that may be invested in securities
and instruments that are economically tied to emerging market countries
will afford the Fund the opportunity to invest in a broader range of
financial instruments related to emerging markets and, therefore, may
facilitate the Fund's meeting its investment objective.\9\ The
Commission previously has approved listing and trading on the Exchange
of shares of actively-managed exchange-traded funds under NYSE Arca
Equities Rule 8.600 that may invest up to 20% of the applicable fund's
total assets in emerging market debt securities.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ As stated in the Prior Release, according to the
Registration Statement, PIMCO will have broad discretion to identify
countries that it considers to qualify as emerging markets. In
making investments in emerging market securities, the Fund will
emphasize those countries with relatively low gross national product
per capita and with the potential for rapid economic growth.
Emerging market countries are generally located in Asia, Africa, the
Middle East, Latin America and Eastern Europe. PIMCO will select the
country and currency composition based on its evaluation of relative
interest rates, inflation rates, exchange rates, monetary and fiscal
policies, trade and current account balances, legal and political
developments and any other specific factors it believes to be
relevant. While emerging markets corporate debt securities
(excluding commercial paper) generally must have $200 million or
more par amount outstanding and significant par value traded to be
considered as an eligible investment for the Fund, at least 80% of
issues of such securities held by the Fund must have $200 million or
more par amount outstanding at the time of investment.
    \8\ See note 4, supra.
    \9\ According to the Registration Statement, the Fund's
investment objective will be to seek maximum real return, consistent
with preservation of capital and prudent investment management.
    \10\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 69061
(March 7, 2013), 78 FR 15990 (March 13, 2013) (SR-NYSEArca-2013-01)
(order approving listing and trading on the Exchange of Shares of
the Newfleet Multi-Sector Income Fund under NYSE Arca Equities Rule
8.600); 68863 (February 7, 2013), 78 FR 10222 (February 13, 2013)
(SR-NYSEArca-2012-142) (order approving listing and trading on the
Exchange of Shares of the Guggenheim Enhanced Total Return ETF under
NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.600).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Prior Release stated the effective duration of the
Fund normally will vary within three years (plus or minus) of the
effective portfolio duration of the securities comprising the Barclays
Capital U.S. TIPS Index, as calculated by PIMCO, which as of January
31, 2013, as converted, was 6.16 years.\11\ The Adviser proposes to
change this representation to provide that the effective duration of
the Fund normally will vary within three years (plus or minus) of the
effective portfolio duration, as calculated by PIMCO, of the securities
comprising the BofAMerrill 1-Year Constant Maturity US TIPS Index
(``Index''). The effective portfolio duration of the securities
comprising the Index, as calculated by PIMCO, was approximately 0.95
years as of April 30, 2014. The effective duration of the Index will be
calculated using the same conversion factors as the Fund. The Adviser
represents that it wishes to reduce the interest rate sensitivity of
the Fund's investments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ The Prior Release stated that, according to the
Registration Statement, effective duration takes into account that
for certain bonds expected cash flows will fluctuate as interest
rates change and is defined in nominal yield terms, which is market
convention for most bond investors and managers. The Prior Release
stated that the effective duration of the Barclays Capital U.S. TIPS
Index will be calculated using the same conversion factors as the
Fund.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Adviser represents that there is no change to the Fund's
investment objective.
    The Fund will comply with all initial and continued listing
requirements under NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.600.
    Except for the changes noted above, all other facts presented and
representations made in the Prior Release remain unchanged.
    All terms referenced but not defined herein are defined in the
Prior Release.
2. Statutory Basis
    The basis under the Act for this proposed rule change is the
requirement under Section 6(b)(5) \12\ that an exchange have rules that
are designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices,
to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove
impediments to, and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market
and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The proposed rule change is designed to promote just and equitable
principles of trade and to protect investors and the public interest in
that the Adviser represents that there is no change to the Fund's
investment objective. The Fund will comply with all initial and
continued listing requirements under NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.600. The
Adviser represents that the proposed increase from up to 10% to up to
20% of its total assets in securities and

instruments that are economically tied to emerging market countries
(subject to the Fund's investment limitations relating to particular
asset classes set forth in the Prior Release) will afford the Fund the
opportunity to invest in a broader range of financial instruments
related to emerging markets and, therefore, may facilitate the Fund's
meeting its investment objective. The Adviser further represents that
the proposed change to the index used by the Fund as a measure of
duration is appropriate in that the Adviser wishes to reduce the
interest rate sensitivity of the Fund's investments in seeking the
Fund's investment objective.\13\ The effective duration of the Index
will be calculated using the same conversion factors as the Fund. As a
result of this change, the Adviser represents that it wishes to reduce
the interest rate sensitivity of the Fund's investments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Duration is a measure used to determine the sensitivity of
a security's price to changes in interest rates. The longer a
security's duration, the more sensitive it will be to interest
rates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change is designed to perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest in that the Fund will comply with all initial and
continued listing requirements under NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.600. In
addition, the Adviser represents that it is changing the name of the
Fund to better reflect the nature of the Fund's revised investment
strategy. The Adviser represents that the proposed increase in the
Fund's total assets that may be invested in securities and instruments
that are economically tied to emerging market countries will afford the
Fund the opportunity to invest in a broader range of financial
instruments related to emerging markets and, therefore, may facilitate
the Fund's meeting its investment objective. The Adviser represents
that the change to the index used by the Fund as a measure of duration
should result in overall Fund investments that are less sensitive to
changes in interest rates. The Adviser represents that there is no
change to the Fund's investment objective. Except for the changes noted
above, all other representations made in the Prior Release remain
unchanged.

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 that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed increase from
up to 10% to up to 20% of the Fund's total assets that may be invested
in securities and instruments that are economically tied to emerging
market countries will permit the Fund to invest in instruments that are
economically tied to emerging market countries up to a level consistent
with certain other actively-managed exchange-traded funds \14\ and will
enhance competition among issues of Managed Fund Shares that invest in
fixed income securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See note 10, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change 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, the proposed rule
change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act
\15\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give 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.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend 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 email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSEArca-2014-68 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2014-68. 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 such filing will also be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2014-68 and should
be submitted on or before July 21, 2014.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-15200 Filed 6-27-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 72 (Tuesday, April 15, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21305-21307]
[FR Doc No: 2014-08526]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 31013; File No. 812-14210]

Ivy Funds, et al.; Notice of Application

April 10, 2014.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').

ACTION: Notice of an application under section 6(c) of the Investment
Company Act of 1940 (``Act'') for an exemption from section 15(a) of
the Act and rule 18f-2 under the Act, as well as from certain
disclosure requirements.

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

    Summary of Application: Applicants request an order that would
permit them to enter into and materially amend subadvisory agreements
without shareholder approval and would grant relief from certain
disclosure requirements.
    Applicants: Ivy Funds (``Ivy Trust''), Waddell & Reed Advisors
Funds (``WR Trust''), and Ivy Funds Variable Insurance Portfolios
(``Ivy VIP Trust'') (each, a ``Trust,'' and collectively, the
``Trusts''); Ivy Investment Management Company (``IICO''), and Waddell
& Reed Investment Management Company (``WRIMCO'') (each, an
``Adviser,'' and collectively, the ``Advisers'').

DATES: Filing Dates: The application was filed on September 10, 2013
and amended on January 24, 2014 and April 3, 2014.
    Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An order granting the
application will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing.
Interested persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's
Secretary and serving applicants with a copy of the request, personally
or by mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by
5:30 p.m. on May 5, 2014, and should be accompanied by proof of service
on the applicants, in the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a
certificate of service. Hearing requests should state the nature of the
writer's interest, the reason for the request, and the issues
contested. Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing may request
notification by writing to the Commission's Secretary.

ADDRESSES:  Secretary, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F
Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. Applicants: Waddell & Reed
Investment Management Company, 6300 Lamar Avenue, Overland Park, Kansas
66202.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Deepak T. Pai, Senior Counsel, at
(202) 551-6876 or Mary Kay Frech, Branch Chief, at<PHONE_NUMBER>
(Division of Investment Management, Chief Counsel's Office).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  The following is a summary of the
application. The complete application may be obtained via the
Commission's Web site by searching for the file number, or an applicant
using the Company name box, at http://www.sec.gov/search/search.htm or
by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Applicants' Representations

    1. Ivy Trust, WR Trust, and Ivy VIP Trust are organized as Delaware
statutory trusts and are registered under the Act as open-end
management investment companies. Each Trust offers multiple series
(each a ``Fund'' and together the ``Funds''), each with its own
investment objectives, policies, and restrictions.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Applicants also request relief with respect to any future
series of each Trust and any other existing or future registered
open-end management investment company or series thereof that: (a)
Is advised by either of the Advisers, including any entity
controlling, controlled by or under common control with either of
the Advisers or their successors (included in the term ``Adviser'');
(b) uses the manager of managers structure (``Manager of Managers
Structure'') described in the application; and (c) complies with the
terms and conditions of the application. The only existing
registered open-end management investment companies that currently
may rely on the requested order are named as applicants. For
purposes of the requested order, ``successor'' is limited to any
entity that results from a reorganization into another jurisdiction
or a change in the type of business organization. If the name of any
Fund contains the name of a Subadviser (as defined below), the name
of the Adviser, or a trademark or trade name that is owned by the
Adviser, will precede the name of the Subadviser.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. IICO and WRIMCO, wholly owned subsidiaries of Waddell & Reed
Financial Inc., are registered as investment advisers under the
Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (``Advisers Act''). IICO serves as the
investment adviser to each Fund of Ivy Trust and WRIMCO serves as
investment adviser to each Fund of WR Trust and Ivy VIP Trust. Each
Adviser serves as investment adviser to the Funds pursuant to an
investment advisory agreement between the Adviser and the applicable
Trust (the ``Advisory Agreements''), approved by the board of trustees
of the applicable Trust (each a ``Board''),\2\ including a majority of
the trustees who are not ``interested persons,'' as defined in section
2(a)(19) of the Act, of the Trust, the Adviser, or any Subadviser (as
defined below) (the

``Independent Trustees'') and by the initial shareholder of each of the
Funds in the manner required by sections 15(a) and 15(c) of the Act and
rule 18f-2 thereunder. Applicants are not seeking any exemptions from
the provisions of the Act with respect to any Advisory Agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The term ``Board'' also includes the board of trustees or
directors of a future Trust and future Fund, if different.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. Under the terms of the Advisory Agreements, each Adviser,
subject to the oversight of the applicable Board, is responsible for
the overall management of the Funds' business affairs and selecting the
Funds' investments according to the Funds' investment objectives,
policies, and restrictions. For the investment advisory services that
they provide to the Funds, the Advisers receive a fee from the Funds as
specified in the Advisory Agreements. The Advisory Agreements also
authorize the Advisers to retain one or more unaffiliated investment
subadvisers (each, a ``Subadviser''), to be compensated by the Advisers
for the purpose of managing the investment of the assets of the Funds.
The Advisers have entered into subadvisory agreements (``Subadvisory
Agreements'') with various Subadvisers to provide investment advisory
services to certain Funds in each Trust.\3\ Each Subadviser is, and
each future Subadviser will be, an ``investment adviser,'' as defined
in section 2(a)(20)(B) of the Act, and registered as an investment
adviser under the Advisers Act, or not subject to such registration.
The Advisers will evaluate, allocate assets to, and oversee the
Subadvisers, and make recommendations about their hiring, termination,
and replacement to the applicable Board, at all times subject to the
authority of that Board. The Adviser compensates each Subadviser out of
the fee paid by a Fund to the Adviser under the Advisory Agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ All existing Subadvisory Agreements comply with sections
15(a) and (c) of the Act and rule 18f-2 thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    4. Applicants request an order to permit the Advisers, subject to
Board approval, to engage Subadvisers to manage all or a portion of the
assets of a Fund pursuant to a Subadvisory Agreement and materially
amend Subadvisory Agreements without obtaining shareholder approval.
The requested relief will not extend to any Subadviser that is an
``affiliated person,'' as defined in section 2(a)(3) of the Act, of a
Fund or the Adviser, other than by reason of serving as Subadviser to a
Fund (``Affiliated Subadviser'').
    5. Applicants also request an order exempting each Fund from
certain disclosure provisions described below that may require the
Funds to disclose fees paid by the Advisers to each Subadviser.
Applicants seek an order to permit each Fund to disclose (as both a
dollar amount and as a percentage of a Fund's net assets) only: (a) The
aggregate fees paid to its Adviser and any Affiliated Subadvisers; and
(b) the aggregate fees paid to Subadvisers other than Affiliated
Subadvisers (collectively, the ``Aggregate Fee Disclosure''). A Fund
that employs an Affiliated Subadviser will provide separate disclosure
of any fees paid to the Affiliated Subadviser.
    6. The Funds will inform shareholders of the hiring of a new
Subadviser pursuant to the following procedures (``Modified Notice and
Access Procedures''): (a) Within 90 days after a new Subadviser is
hired for any Fund, that Fund will send its shareholders either a
Multi-Manager Notice or a Multi-Manager Notice and Multi-Manager
Information Statement; \4\ and (b) the Fund will make the Multi-Manager
Information Statement available on the Web site identified in the
Multi-Manager Notice no later than when the Multi-Manager Notice (or
Multi-Manager Notice and Multi-Manager Information Statement) is first
sent to shareholders, and will maintain it on that Web site for at
least 90 days.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ A ``Multi-Manager Notice'' will be modeled on a Notice of
Internet Availability as defined in rule 14a-16 under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange Act''), and specifically will,
among other things: (a) Summarize the relevant information regarding
the new Subadviser; (b) inform shareholders that the Multi-Manager
Information Statement is available on a Web site; (c) provide the
Web site address; (d) state the time period during which the Multi-
Manager Information Statement will remain available on that Web
site; (e) provide instructions for accessing and printing the Multi-
Manager Information Statement; and (f) instruct the shareholder that
a paper or email copy of the Multi-Manager Information Statement may
be obtained, without charge, by contacting the Funds. A ``Multi-
Manager Information Statement'' will meet the requirements of
Regulation 14C, Schedule 14C and Item 22 of Schedule 14A under the
Exchange Act for an information statement, except as modified by the
requested order to permit Aggregate Fee Disclosure. Multi-Manager
Information Statements will be filed electronically with the
Commission via the EDGAR system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Applicants' Legal Analysis

    1. Section 15(a) of the Act provides, in relevant part, that it is
unlawful for any person to act as an investment adviser to a registered
investment company except pursuant to a written contract that has been
approved by the vote of a majority of the company's outstanding voting
securities. Rule 18f-2 under the Act provides that each series or class
of stock in a series investment company affected by a matter must
approve that matter if the Act requires shareholder approval.
    2. Form N-1A is the registration statement used by open-end
investment companies. Item 19(a)(3) of Form N-1A requires disclosure of
the method and amount of the investment adviser's compensation.
    3. Rule 20a-1 under the Act requires proxies solicited with respect
to a registered investment company to comply with Schedule 14A under
the Exchange Act. Items 22(c)(1)(ii), 22(c)(1)(iii), 22(c)(8) and
22(c)(9) of Schedule 14A, taken together, require a proxy statement for
a shareholder meeting at which the advisory contract will be voted upon
to include the ``rate of compensation of the investment adviser,'' the
``aggregate amount of the investment adviser's fees,'' a description of
the ``terms of the contract to be acted upon,'' and, if a change in the
advisory fee is proposed, the existing and proposed fees and the
difference between the two fees.
    4. Regulation S-X sets forth the requirements for financial
statements required to be included as part of a registered investment
company's registration statement and shareholder reports filed with the
Commission. Sections 6-07(2)(a), (b) and (c) of Regulation S-X require
a registered investment company to include in its financial statement
information about the investment advisory fees.
    5. Section 6(c) of the Act provides that the Commission may exempt
any person, security, or transaction or any class or classes of
persons, securities, or transactions from any provision of the Act, or
from any rule thereunder, if such exemption is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest and consistent with the protection of investors
and the purposes fairly intended by the policy and provisions of the
Act. Applicants state that the requested relief meets this standard for
the reasons discussed below.
    6. Applicants assert that the shareholders expect each Fund's
Adviser, subject to the review and approval of the Board, to select the
Subadvisers who are best suited to achieve the Fund's investment
objective. Applicants assert that, from the perspective of the
shareholder, the role of the Subadviser is substantially equivalent to
the role of the individual portfolio managers employed by traditional
investment company advisory firms. Applicants state that requiring
shareholder approval of each Subadvisory Agreement would impose
unnecessary delays and expenses on the Funds, and may preclude a Fund
from acting promptly when the applicable Board and Adviser believe that
a change would benefit the Fund and its

shareholders. Applicants note that the Advisory Agreements and any
Subadvisory Agreement with an Affiliated Subadviser (if any) will
continue to be subject to the shareholder approval requirements of
section 15(a) of the Act and rule 18f-2 under the Act.
    7. Applicants assert that the requested disclosure relief would
benefit shareholders of the Funds because it would improve the
Advisers' ability to negotiate the fees paid to Subadvisers. Applicants
state that the Advisers may be able to negotiate rates that are below a
Subadviser's ``posted'' amounts, if the Adviser is not required to
disclose the Subadvisers' fees to the public. Applicants submit that
the requested relief will encourage Subadvisers to negotiate lower
subadvisory fees with the Advisers if the lower fees are not required
to be made public.

Applicants' Conditions

    Applicants agree that any order granting the requested relief will
be subject to the following conditions: \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Applicants will only comply with conditions 9, 10, and 11 if
they rely on the fee disclosure relief that would allow them to
provide Aggregate Fee Disclosure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    1. Before a Fund may rely on the requested order, the operation of
the Fund in the manner described in the application will be approved by
a majority of the Fund's outstanding voting securities, as defined in
the Act, or in the case of a Fund whose public shareholders purchase
shares on the basis of a prospectus containing the disclosure
contemplated by condition 2 below, by the initial shareholder(s) before
offering shares of that Fund to the public.
    2. Each Fund relying on the requested order will disclose in its
prospectus the existence, substance, and effect of any order granted
pursuant to the application. Each Fund will hold itself out to the
public as utilizing the Manager of Managers Structure. The prospectus
will prominently disclose that the Adviser has ultimate responsibility
(subject to oversight by the Board) to oversee the Subadvisers and
recommend their hiring, termination, and replacement.
    3. Each Fund will inform shareholders of the hiring of a new
Subadviser within 90 days after the hiring of the new Subadviser
pursuant to the Modified Notice and Access Procedures.
    4. The Advisers will not enter into a subadvisory agreement with
any Affiliated Subadviser without such agreement, including the
compensation to be paid thereunder, being approved by the shareholders
of the applicable Fund.
    5. At all times, at least a majority of each Trust's Board will be
Independent Trustees, and the nomination of new or additional
Independent Trustees will be placed within the discretion of the then-
existing Independent Trustees.
    6. Whenever a subadviser change is proposed for a Fund with an
Affiliated Subadviser, the applicable Board, including a majority of
the Independent Trustees, will make a separate finding, reflected in
the Board minutes, that such change is in the best interests of the
Fund and its shareholders, and does not involve a conflict of interest
from which the applicable Adviser or the Affiliated Subadviser derives
an inappropriate advantage.
    7. The Advisers will provide general management services to the
Funds, including overall supervisory responsibility for the general
management and investment of each Fund's assets, and, subject to review
and approval of the applicable Board, will: (a) Set each Fund's overall
investment strategies; (b) evaluate, select and recommend Subadvisers
to manage all or a part of each Fund's assets; (c) allocate and, when
appropriate, reallocate each Fund's assets among one or more
Subadvisers; (d) monitor and evaluate the performance of Subadvisers;
and (e) implement procedures reasonably designed to ensure that the
Subadvisers comply with each Fund's investment objective, policies and
restrictions.
    8. No trustee or officer of the Trusts or the Funds, or director,
manager or officer of the Advisers, will own, directly or indirectly
(other than through a pooled investment vehicle that is not controlled
by such person), any interest in a Subadviser, except for (a) ownership
of interests in the Advisers or any entity that controls, is controlled
by, or is under common control with the Advisers, or (b) ownership of
less than 1% of the outstanding securities of any class of equity or
debt of any publicly traded company that is either a Subadviser or an
entity that controls, is controlled by or is under common control with
a Subadviser.
    9. Whenever a Subadviser is hired or terminated, the Adviser will
provide the Board with information showing the expected impact on the
profitability of the Adviser.
    10. Each Fund relying on the requested order will disclose in its
registration statement the Aggregate Fee Disclosure.
    11. Each Adviser will provide the Board, no less frequently than
quarterly, with information about the profitability of the Adviser on a
per-Fund basis. The information will reflect the impact on
profitability of the hiring or termination of any Subadviser during the
applicable quarter.
    12. Independent legal counsel, as defined in rule 0-1(a)(6) under
the Act, will be engaged to represent the Independent Trustees. The
selection of such counsel will be within the discretion of the then-
existing Independent Trustees.
    13. In the event the Commission adopts a rule under the Act
providing substantially similar relief to that in the order requested
in the application, the requested order will expire on the effective
date of that rule.
    14. Any new Subadvisory Agreement or any amendment to a Fund's
existing Advisory Agreement or Subadvisory Agreement that directly or
indirectly results in an increase in the aggregate advisory fee rate
payable by the Fund will be submitted to the Fund's shareholders for
approval.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
under delegated authority.
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-08526 Filed 4-14-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 136 (Monday, July 16, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 41777]
[FR Doc No: 2012-17216]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

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

    Docket Numbers: EC12-116-000.
    Applicants: Iron Energy LLC.
    Description: Application for Authorization for Disposition of
Jurisdictional Facilities and Request for Expedited Action of Iron
Energy LLC.
    Filed Date: 7/6/12.
    Accession Number: 20120706-5121.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/27/12.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG12-84-000.
    Applicants: Spion Kop Wind, LLC.
    Description: Spion Kop Wind, LLC Notice of Self-Certification of
Exempt Wholesale Generator Status.
    Filed Date: 7/6/12.
    Accession Number: 20120706-5088.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/27/12.

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

    Docket Numbers: ER07-956-002.
    Applicants: Entergy Services, Inc.
    Description: Compliance refund report of Entergy Services, Inc.
    Filed Date: 7/6/12.
    Accession Number: 20120706-5120.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/27/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2172-011; ER11-2016-006; ER10-2184-011; ER10-
2183-008; ER10-1048-008; ER10-2176-012; ER10-2192-011; ER11-2056-005;
ER10-2178-011; ER10-2174-011; ER11-2014-008; ER11-2013-008; ER10-3308-
010; ER10-1017-007; ER10-1020-007; ER10-1145-007; ER10-1144-006; ER10-
1078-007; ER10-1079-007; ER10-1080-007; ER11-2010-008; ER10-1081-007;
ER10-2180-011; ER11-2011-007; ER11-2009-007; ER11-3989-006; ER10-1143-
007; ER11-2780-004; ER11-2007-006; ER12-1223-005; ER11-2005-008.
    Applicants: Constellation Energy Commodities Group, Inc.,
Commonwealth Edison Company, PECO Energy Company, Wind Capital
Holdings, LLC, Constellation Power Source Generation, Inc., Safe Harbor
Water Power Corporation, Baltimore Gas & Electric Company, Handsome
Lake Energy, LLC, Constellation Energy Commodities Group Maine, LLC,
Exelon Framingham LLC, Exelon New England Power Marketing, LP, Exelon
New Boston, LLC, Exelon West Medway, LLC, Exelon Wyman, LLC,
Constellation NewEenergy, Inc., Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Exelon
Energy Company, CER Generation, LLC, CER Generation II, LLC,
Constellation Mystic Power, LLC, Cassia Gulch Wind Park, LLC, Michigan
Wind 1, LLC, Tuana Springs Energy, LLC, Harvest Windfarm, LLC, CR
Clearing, LLC, Exelon Wind 4, LLC, Cow Branch Wind Power, L.L.C.,
Michigan Wind 2, LLC, Criterion Power Parnters, LLC, Wildcat Wind, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Baltimore
Gas & Electric Company, et al.
    Filed Date: 7/6/12.
    Accession Number: 20120706-5131.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/27/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2181-013; ER10-2179-013; ER10-2182-013.
    Applicants: R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant, LLC, Calvert Cliffs
Nuclear Power Plant, LLC, Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Nine Mile
Point Nuclear Station, LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 7/6/12.
    Accession Number: 20120706-5123.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/27/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-1840-001.
    Applicants: Michigan Electric Transmission Company, LLC.
    Description: METC Certificate of Concurrence to be effective 7/13/
2012.
    Filed Date: 7/6/12.
    Accession Number: 20120706-5043.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/27/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-1841-001.
    Applicants: Michigan Electric Transmission Company, LLC.
    Description: METC Certificate of Concurrence to be effective 7/11/
2012.
    Filed Date: 7/6/12.
    Accession Number: 20120706-5050.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/27/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-1843-001.
    Applicants: Michigan Electric Transmission Company, LLC.
    Description: METC Certificate of Concurrence to be effective 7/12/
2012.
    Filed Date: 7/6/12.
    Accession Number: 20120706-5052.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/27/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-2215-000.
    Applicants: Spion Kop Wind, LLC.
    Description: Application for Market-Based Rate Authority to be
effective 7/9/2012.
    Filed Date: 7/6/12.
    Accession Number: 20120706-5074.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/27/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-2216-000.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
    Description: 07-06-12 AIC Attachment O and GG to be effective 1/1/
2013 under ER12-2216 Filing Type: 10.
    Filed Date: 7/6/12.
    Accession Number: 20120706-5075.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/27/12.

    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
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: July 9, 2012.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-17216 Filed 7-13-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P