[Federal Register: February 28, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 40)]
[Notices]
[Page 10852-10854]
[DOCID:fr28fe08-115]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-57368; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2008-011]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
Relating to Equity Securities Using Alternative Settlement Processes in
Nasdaq's PORTAL System

February 21, 2008.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on February 7, 2008, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which
Items have been prepared primarily by Nasdaq. Nasdaq has filed the
proposal pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \3\ and Rule
19b-4(f)(6) thereunder \4\ so that the proposal was effective upon
filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Nasdaq proposes to allow issuers of PORTAL equity securities to
select settlement procedures that do not involve submission to The
Depository Trust Company (``DTC'').

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

    In its filing with the Commission, Nasdaq 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. Nasdaq 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

    Currently, in order to qualify for inclusion in Nasdaq's PORTAL
Market (``PORTAL''), an equity security must be depository eligible.\5\
Recently, however, issuers and market participants have implemented
alternative regular way non-DTC settlement arrangements for a small
subset of Commission Rule 144A equity offerings in order to ensure
compliance with various regulatory obligations or trading conditions
for the security imposed by its issuer including monitoring the number
of record holders for purposes of determining the issuer's reporting
obligations under Section 12(g) of the Act. These alternative
settlement arrangements are generally implemented through the execution
of written agreements among the market participants that obligate them
to settle transactions in accordance with the alternative settlement
process. Having agreed to follow and be subject to the alternative
settlement process, approved participants are then given authorizing
credentials that allow them to engage in transactions in the
alternative settlement security with other preapproved counter-parties.
This process enhances the likelihood that trades in such securities
settle appropriately.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Rule 6502(b)(1)(C). Nasdaq defines ``depository eligible''
in Rule 11310. Although not specifically required, the primary
securities depository for Nasdaq transactions is DTC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In order to provide the enhanced functionality and transparency of
the PORTAL system to such issuers, Nasdaq proposes to allow restricted
securities using such alternative settlement processes access to
PORTAL. Under the proposal, issuers of Rule 144A equity securities, as
defined in Rule 6501(c) of the PORTAL Market rules (``PORTAL Equity
Securities''), that intend to use an alternative settlement process
would have their issues designated as PORTAL Equity Securities, which
would permit such PORTAL Equity Securities to be quoted, traded, and
reported for dissemination and regulatory purposes through the PORTAL
System like other PORTAL Equity Securities. In order to qualify for
PORTAL designation, the alternative settlement security must use an
alternative settlement process that: (1) Is mandated by the issuer; (2)
provides adequate disclosure to investors of the existence of the
alternative settlement process, and (3) includes information,
technology, and procedures sufficient for Nasdaq to send and receive
transaction and other information necessary to the effectuate the
process. For qualified alternative settlement securities, the PORTAL
system will establish communication linkages and processes with the
operators of alternative settlement processes that will be used to seek
to ensure that only PORTAL market participants that have met the
prerequisites for participation in the process enter indicative quotes,
orders, or execute a trade through the PORTAL System in the alternative
settlement security. For example, the PORTAL system will regularly
communicate with operators of alternative settlement processes and will
prevent entities that have not been approved by those operators from
entering quotes or orders in the particular alternative settlement
security into PORTAL. Once a trade in a PORTAL Equity Security that
relies upon an alternative settlement process is consummated, details
of the trade will be provided to the alternative settlement process by
the PORTAL system.
    Nasdaq believes that the above proposal enhances the flexibility
for issuers of Commission Rule 144 equity securities to choose a non-
DTC settlement process that meets their needs and also increases the
efficiency and transparency of the trading in such issues through
access to the PORTAL system.
    Nasdaq states that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\6\ in general, and with Sections
6(b)(5) of the Act,\7\ in particular, in that the proposal is designed
to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote
just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and
coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling,
processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions
in securities, 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. Nasdaq believes that
offering access to its PORTAL system to equity securities that rely on
an alternative settlement processes will enhance the efficiency and
transparency of the trading of such securities and will facilitate the
reporting of trades in such securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Nasdaq does not believe that the proposed rule change will result
in any burden on competition that is 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

    Nasdaq did not solicit or receive written comments on the proposed
rule change.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \8\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder \9\
because it does not: (1) Significantly affect the protection of
investors or the public interest; (2) impose any significant burden on
competition; and (3) become operative for 30 days from the date on
which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may
designate. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 No. SR-NASDAQ-2008-011 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File No. SR-NASDAQ-2008-011. 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, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at Nasdaq's principal office. 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 No. SR-NASDAQ-2008-011 and should be
submitted on or before March 20, 2008.

    For the Commission by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. E8-3733 Filed 2-27-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 107 (Friday, June 3, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35811-35812]
[FR Doc No: 2016-13143]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Public Notice For Waiver of Aeronautical Land-Use Assurance;
Former Willmar Municipal Airport Willmar, MN

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of intent of waiver with respect to land.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is considering a
proposal to authorize the release of approximately 482.21 acres of the
airport property at the Former Willmar Municipal Airport, Willmar MN.
    The acreage being released is not needed for aeronautical use as
the City built a new replacement airport that became operational in
2006.
    The acreage was originally acquired with local, State of Minnesota,
and federal funds. The federal funds associated with the land came from
a Federal Aid to Airports Grant in 1957 (Grant Number 9-21-040-5702).
The FAA approved a Finding of No Significant Impact for the release of
the former Willmar Municipal Airport on September 20, 2013. Approval
does not constitute a commitment by the FAA to financially assist in
the disposal of the subject airport property nor a determination of
eligibility for grant-in-aid funding from the FAA. The disposition of
proceeds from the disposal of the airport property will be in
accordance with FAA's Policy and Procedures Concerning the Use of
Airport Revenue, published in the Federal Register on February 16,
1999.
    In accordance with section 47107(h) of title 49, United States
Code, this notice is required to be published in the Federal Register
30 days before modifying the land-use assurance that requires the
property to be used for an aeronautical purpose.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 5, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Ms. Nancy Nistler, Program Manager, Federal Aviation
Administration, Airports District Office, 6020 28th Avenue South, Room
102, Minneapolis, MN 55450-2706. Telephone Number<PHONE_NUMBER>/FAX
Number<PHONE_NUMBER>. Documents reflecting this FAA action and the
legal description of the property may be reviewed at this same location
or at the Minnesota Department of Transportation, 222 East Plato Blvd.,
St. Paul MN, 55107

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Nancy Nistler, Program Manager,
Federal Aviation Administration, Airports District Office, 6020 28th
Avenue South, Room 102, Minneapolis, MN 55450-2706. Telephone Number
(612)253-4638/FAX Number<PHONE_NUMBER>. Documents reflecting this FAA
action and the legal description of the property may be reviewed at
this same location or at the Minnesota Department of Transportation,
222 East Plato Blvd., St. Paul MN, 55107.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Following is a description of the subject
airport property to be released at Former Willmar Municipal Airport in
Willmar, Minnesota and described as follows:
    Approximately 482.21 acres of airport property at the Former
Willmar Municipal Airport which includes the land encompassing the
runway area of the former airport that is east and west of County Road
55, north of Minnesota State Highway 40 (MN-40) and east of County Road
5; land for the former airport terminal building and extending east to
18th Street SW and South to 15th Avenue SW; a parcel of land south of
US Highway 12 and east of County Road 5, and a parcel of land south of
MN-40 and east of County Road 55.
    Said parcel subject to all easements, restrictions, and
reservations of record.

    Issued in Minneapolis, MN on May 18, 2016.
Andy Peek,
Manager, Dakota-Minnesota Airports District Office, FAA, Great Lakes
Region.
[FR Doc. 2016-13143 Filed 6-2-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


Appendix A Formation and Control of Disinfection Byproducts This page intentionally left blank. Significant Excursion Guidance Manual Proposal Draft July 2003 A 1 A. 1 Introduction The purpose of this appendix is to identify the factors that affect formation of disinfection byproducts ( DBPs) in water treatment processes and distribution systems. It is intended to serve as a tool for systems in identifying potential strategies for reducing DBP concentrations. This appendix is divided into two main sections. Section A. 2 discusses the factors that affect DBP formation. Section A. 3 discusses options for controlling DBP formation in general terms; it is not intended to provide guidance on implementation of DBP control strategies.

A. 2 Formation of DBPs Organic DBPs ( and oxidation byproducts) are formed by the reaction between organic substances, inorganic compounds such as bromide, and oxidizing agents that are added to water during treatment. In most water sources, natural organic matter ( NOM) is the major constituent of organic substances and DBP precursors. Total organic carbon ( TOC) is typically used as a surrogate measure for NOM levels. The two terms are used interchangeably in much of the discussion presented here. The following major factor affecting the type and amount of DBPs formed.

Type of disinfectant, dose, and residual concentration

Contact time and mixing conditions between disinfectant ( oxidant) and precursors

Concentration and characteristics of precursors

Water temperature

Water chemistry ( including pH, bromide ion concentration, organic nitrogen concentration, and presence of other reducing agents such as iron and manganese)

A summary of these factors follows.

A. 2.1 Impact of Disinfection Method on Organic DBP Formation Organic DBPs can be subdivided into halogenated and non halogenated byproducts. Halogenated organic disinfection byproducts are formed when organic and inorganic compounds found in water react with free chlorine, free bromine, or free iodine. The formation reactions may take place in the treatment plant and the distribution system. Free chlorine can be introduced to water directly as a primary or secondary disinfectant, or as a byproduct of the manufacturing of chlorine dioxide and chloramines. Reactions between NOM, bromide and iodide ions and chlorine lead to the formation of a variety of halogenated DBPs including THMs and HAAs. Further, the oxidation of organic nitrogen can lead to the formation of DBPs containing nitrogen, such as Significant Excursion Guidance Manual Proposal Draft July 2003 A 2 haloacetonitriles, halopicrins, and cyanogens halides ( Reckhow et al., 1990; Hoigné and Bader, 1988).

Non halogenated DBPs may form when precursors react with strong oxidants. For example, the reaction of organics with ozone and hydrogen peroxide results in the formation of aldehydes, aldo and keto acids, and organic acids ( Singer, 1999). Chlorine can also trigger the formation of some non halogenated DBPs ( Singer and Harrington, 1993). Many of the low molecular weight non halogenated DBPs are biodegradable.

Trussell and Umphres ( 1978) reported that the presence of bromide can affect both the rate and the yield of DBPs, as well as that as the ratio of bromide to NOM ( measured as total organic carbon) increases, the percentage of brominated DBPs also increases. Free chlorine and ozone oxidize bromide ion to hypobromite ion/ hypobromous acid. Hypobromous acid is a more effective substituting agent than hypochlorous acid ( a better oxidant) and can in turn react with NOM, forming brominated DBPs such as bromoform, and mixed bromo chloro species ( Krasner, 1999). Similarly, the presence of iodide may result in the formation of mixed chlorobromoiodomethanes byproducts ( Bichsel and Von Gunten, 2000).

Studies have documented that chloramines produce significantly lower halogenated DBP levels than free chlorine, and there is no clear evidence that the reaction of NOM and chloramine leads to the formation of THMs ( Singer and Reckhow, 1999; USEPA, 1999). Predictions of an empirical DBP formation model calibrated using ICR data indicated that under chloraminated conditions THMs and HAAs are formed in full scale plants and distribution systems at a fraction of the amount that would be expected based on observations of DBP formation under free chlorine conditions. The amount of formation with chloramines varied from 5% to 35% of that calculated for free chlorine, depending on the individual DBP species ( Swanson et al., 2001). The benefits of low DBP formation with chloramines are especially important for controlling formation at the extremities of the distribution system.

When chloramination is used, it is possible that DBPs might form if chlorine is added before ammonia. If the mixing process is inefficient, it is also possible that DBPs might form during the mixing of chlorine and ammonia. In this case, free chlorine might react with NOM before the complete formation of chloramines. In addition, monochloramine slowly hydrolyzes to release free chlorine in water. This free chlorine may contribute to the formation of small amounts of additional DBPs in the distribution system.

The application of chlorine dioxide does not produce significant amounts of organic halogenated DBPs unless chlorine is formed as an impurity in the generation process. Only small amounts of total organic halides ( TOXs, a surrogate measure for halogenated organic compounds including THMs and HAAs) are formed. However, THMs and HAAs will form if excess chlorine is added to water to ensure complete reaction with sodium chlorite during the production of chlorine dioxide. Significant Excursion Guidance Manual Proposal Draft July 2003 A 3 To date, there is no evidence to suggest that ultraviolet irradiation ( UV) results in the formation of any disinfection byproducts; however, little research has been performed in this area. Most of the research regarding application of UV and DBP formation has focused on chlorinated DBP formation as a result of UV application prior to the addition of chlorine or chloramines ( Malley et al., 1995). Malley, et al. conducted studies comparing the effects of UV light followed by chlorination versus chloramination. Evidence suggests UV does not affect DBP formation in either of these two cases.

Ozone does not directly produce chlorinated DBPs. However, if chlorine is added before or after ozonation mixed bromo chloro DBPs as well as chlorinated DBPs can form. Ozone can alter the reactions characteristics of NOM and affect the concentration and speciation of halogenated DBPs when chlorine is subsequently added downstream. In waters with sufficient bromide concentrations, ozonation can lead to the formation of bromate and other brominated DBPs. Bromate, like TTHMs and HAA5, is a regulated DBP. Ozonation of natural waters also produces aldehydes, haloketones, ketoacids, carboxylic acids, and other types of biodegradable organic material. The biodegradable fraction of organic material can serve as a nutrient source for microorganisms, and should be removed to prevent microbial regrowth in the distribution system.

To date, many of the byproducts that result from chlorination or from alternative disinfectants are still unknown and unregulated. One explanation for this shortcoming is that these compounds are too polar or too high in molecular weight to be detected using conventional gas chromotography techniques ( James, 1999). As more refined analytical techniques become available additional classes of disinfection byproducts may be scrutinized.

A. 2.2 Disinfectant Dose The concentration of disinfectant can affect the formation of DBPs. As the concentration of disinfectant increases the production of DBPs also increases and formation reactions continue as long as precursors ( NOM) and disinfectant are present. In general, the impact of disinfectant concentration is greater during primary disinfection than during secondary disinfection. The amount of disinfectant added during primary disinfection is usually less than the long term demand, therefore, the concentration of disinfectant is often the limiting factor while unreacted precursors are available. On the contrary, during secondary disinfection DBP formation reactions are often precursor limited since an excess of disinfectant is added to the water to maintain a residual concentration ( Singer and Reckhow, 1999). In distribution systems, DBP formation reactions can become disinfectant limited when the free chlorine residual drops to low levels. As a rule of thumb, Singer and Reckhow ( 1999) suggested this event takes place when the chlorine concentration drops below approximately 0.3 mg/ L.

In many systems booster disinfection is applied to raise disinfectant residual concentration, especially in remote areas of the distribution system or near storage tanks where water age may be high and disinfectant residuals can be low. The additional chlorine dose applied to the water at these booster facilities may increase THM and HAA levels. Further, booster chlorination can Significant Excursion Guidance Manual Proposal Draft July 2003 A 4 maintain high HAA concentrations because the increased disinfection residuals can prevent the biodegradation of HAAs. However, as discussed further in Section A. 3.4 booster chlorination can also be useful in decreasing DBP levels by reducing levels of secondary disinfectant needed in the finished water leaving the plant.

A. 2.3 Time Dependency of DBP Formation In general, DBPs continue to form in drinking water as long as disinfectant residuals and reactive DBP precursors are present, and the longer is the contact time between disinfectant/ oxidant and NOM present, the greater is the amount of DBPs that can be formed. High concentrations of DBPs can accumulate in water. This is a consequence of the chemical stabilities of THMs and HAAs, which are generally quite high in the disinfected drinking water as long as a significant disinfectant residual is still present ( Singer and Reckhow, 1999).

High THM levels usually occur where the water age is the oldest. Unlike THMs, HAAs cannot be consistently related to water age because HAAs are known to biodegrade over time when the disinfectant residual is low. This might result in relatively low HAAs concentrations in areas of the distribution system where disinfectant residuals are depleted.

In contrast to chlorination byproducts, ozonation byproducts form more rapidly, but their period of formation is much shorter than that of chlorination byproducts. This is due to the quicker dissipation of the ozone residual compared to chlorine ( Singer and Reckhow, 1999).

A. 2.4 Concentration and Characteristics of Precursors The formation of halogenated DBPs is related to the concentration of NOM at the point of chlorination. In general greater DBP levels are formed in waters with higher concentrations of precursors. Studies conducted with different fractions of NOM have indicated the reaction between chlorine and NOM with high aromatic content tends to form higher DBP levels than NOM with low aromatic content. For this reason, UV absorption at 254 nm [ UV 254], which is generally linked to the aromatic and unsaturated components of NOM, is considered a good predictor of the tendency of a source water to form THMs and HAAs ( Owen et al., 1998; Singer and Reckhow, 1999). Specific ultraviolet light absorbance ( SUVA) is also often used to characterize aromaticity and molecular weight distribution of NOM. This parameter is defined as the ration between UV 254 and the dissolved organic carbon ( DOC) concentration of water ( Letterman et al., 1999). It should be noted, that the more highly aromatic precursors, characterized by high UV 254, in source waters are more easily removed by coagulation. Thus, it is the UV 254 measurement immediately upstream of the point( s) of chlorination within a treatment plant that is more directly related to THM and HAA formation potential. Significant Excursion Guidance Manual Proposal Draft July 2003 A 5 A. 2.5 Water Temperature Significant Excursion Guidance Manual Proposal Draft July 2003 A 6 The rate of formation of THMs and HAAs increases with increasing temperature. Consequently, the highest THM and HAA levels may occur in the warm summer months. However, water demands are often higher during these months, resulting in lower water age within the distribution system which helps to control DBP formation. Furthermore, high temperature conditions in the distribution system promote the accelerated depletion of residual chlorine, which can mitigate DBP formation and promote biodegradation of HAAs unless chlorine dosages are increased to maintain high residuals ( Singer and Reckhow, 1999). For these reasons, depending on the specific system, the highest THM and HAA levels may be observed during months which are warm, but not necessarily the warmest.

Seasonal trends affect differently where high THM and HAA concentrations might be found. For example, when water is colder, microbial activity is typically lower and DBP formation kinetics are slower. Under these conditions, the highest THM and HAA concentrations might appear coincident with the oldest water in the system. In warmer water, the highest HAA concentrations might appear in fresher water, which is likely to contain higher disinfectant residuals that can prevent the biodegradation of HAAs.

A. 2.6 Water pH In the presence of NOM and chlorine, THM formation increases with increasing pH, whereas the formation of HAAs and other DBPs decrease with increasing pH. The increased THM production at high pH is likely promoted by base hydrolysis ( favored at high pH). HAAs are not sensitive to base hydrolysis but their precursors are. Consequently, pH can alter their formation pathways leading to decreased production with increasing pH ( Singer and Reckhow, 1999).

The major byproducts of ozonation are not affected by base hydrolysis. However, pH can play a role by affecting the rate of decomposition of ozone to hydroxyl radical. The decomposition of ozone accelerates as pH increases. This occurrence is thought to be responsible for the decrease of some byproducts ( e. g., aldeydes) and the increase of others ( e. g., carbonyl byproduct and total organic halides; Singer and Reckhow, 1999). Water pH affects the balance of hypobromite and hypobromous acid formation during the ozonation of waters containing significant concentrations of bromides. At low pH, the equilibrium shifts to the less reactive hypobromous acid. Consequently, the overall formation of bromate decrease as pH decrease ( Singer and Reckhow, 1999). On the other hand, Song et al. ( 1997) suggested that lower pHs favor the formation of TOX ( most likely TOBr) during ozonation. Singer and Reckhow ( 1999) attributed this occurrence to the concurrent suppressed decomposition of ozone, changes in the speciation of the oxidized bromine and the hydrolysis of brominated byproducts.

A. 3 Control of DBPs Alternatives to minimize the formation of DBPs focus on the removal of precursors during treatment, modifications of the oxidation and disinfection processes, control of oxidants dose and Significant Excursion Guidance Manual Proposal Draft July 2003 A 7 residual, reduction of the residence time in the distribution system, and removal of DBPs after formation. Because DBPs are difficult to remove after they have formed, control strategies typically focus on the first four methods.

A. 3.1 Improving Precursors Removal The removal of organic precursors can be improved by optimizing coagulation practices or by employing advanced precursor removal processes such as granular activated carbon ( GAC) adsorption, membrane filtration, or biofiltration.

The process of improving the removal of NOM during the coagulation process is defined as enhanced coagulation. Greater NOM removal can be obtained with adjustments in treatment practice, specifically pH reduction and increased coagulant dosage. The coagulation of NOM appears to be most efficient in the 5 to 6 pH range.

A number of sources have documented that granular activated carbon ( GAC) and nanofiltration ( NF) can be more effective DBP precursor removal processes than conventional coagulation treatment ( McGuire et al., 1989; Owen et al., 1998; Snoeyink et al., 1999; Jacangelo, 1999; Taylor and Wiesner, 1999; and references therein). Reverse osmosis ( RO) can also be very effective for removing precursors. However, when precursor removal ( as opposed to demineralization) is the primary treatment objective, NF is usually preferred to RO because of its lower operating pressure and associated costs. Both NF and RO can remove bromide ( Jacangelo, 1999) while GAC does not appear to remove bromide to any significant extent ( Snoeyink et al., 1999)

Biofiltration can be used to remove a portion of the NOM from water by converting it into inorganic carbon ( CO 2) and it is considered a viable treatment alternative for precursors removal ( Hozalski and Bouwer, 1999). In general, the ideal location for a biofilter is in a rapid media filter and its performance can vary from one plant to another depending on factors such as NOM source and characteristics, use of ozone for preoxidation, residence time in the biofilter, media type, and water temperature ( Hozalski and Bouwer, 1999).

Watershed management practices as well as timing and location of withdrawals can also achieve reductions of DBP precursors in the raw water. The extent of the benefit of implementing this strategy is site specific.

A. 3.2 Disinfection and Oxidation Methods and Disinfectant Dose Chlorination generally produces the highest THM and HAA levels. Other oxidation alternatives to chlorine ( e. g., use of ozone, chloramines, chlorine dioxide, potassium permanganate, and UV radiation) can be used to minimize the formation of TTHM and HAAs. Generally, decreasing the disinfectant dose and residual reduces DBP levels ( see Section A. 2). However, when considering disinfectant changes it is important to consider disinfection needs and Significant Excursion Guidance Manual Proposal Draft July 2003 A 8 maintain the appropriate CT for disinfection. Some alternative disinfectants cannot be used for secondary disinfection. A detailed discussion of alternative disinfectants can be found in the Alternative Disinfectants and Oxidants Guidance Manual ( USEPA, 1999, 815 R 99 014).

A. 3.3 Shifting the Point of Disinfectant Application Shifting the point of disinfectant application from upstream to downstream of the coagulation/ settling process can significantly reduce the formation of DBPs for two main reasons: the amount of precursors is reduced prior to disinfectant addition, and ( particularly for chlorination) the contact time between disinfectant and NOM is reduced. The implementation of this strategy must, however, take into account disinfection needs. Adequate contact time must be always provided after the application of disinfectant to achieve the desired inactivation of microorganisms.

A. 3.4 Control of DBP Formation in the Distribution System For systems maintaining free chlorine residual, significant DBP formation can occur in the distribution system. A long detention time in the distribution system, the presence of NOM in the finished water and the presence of free chlorine residual can promote this occurrence. It is not uncommon that water leaving a treatment plant with low THM and HAA concentrations is found to have high levels of these compounds in the distribution system. Generally, application of secondary disinfectant ( particularly chlorine) to form and maintain a residual in the distribution system results in DBP formation. Implementation of distribution system water quality monitoring, minimization of " dead ends," optimization of storage tank utilization, execution of effective planned system flushing and management of water age can minimize DBP formation.

In some cases, booster chlorination has also been used to control disinfectant application and minimize DBP formation. For example, where the majority of the distribution system is in a confined area near the plant, but a small part is far away from the plant a large dose of disinfectant would be required to maintain a residual in the extreme part of the system. A much higher residual concentration than is needed would be present in the majority of the system. Thus, booster disinfection in the extreme part of the system could dramatically reduce the disinfectant dose at the plant and reduce DBP formation through the system. However, it must also be noted that in areas following booster disinfection facilities, the residence time is often long. If conditions favor formation ( i. e. water age, temperature, NOM concentration) the additional disinfectant added might lead to the formation of high TTHM and HAA levels. Increased disinfectant residual can also prevent biodegradation of HAA, further increasing distribution system levels. The use or addition of booster disinfection requires careful consideration in any DBP control strategy.

A. 3.5 Assessing DBP Formation and Control with the WTP Model Significant Excursion Guidance Manual Proposal Draft July 2003 A 9 If a utility determines, based upon distribution system monitoring, that the DBP levels in their system need to be reduced, they may consider implementing treatment changes in their water treatment plant. To evaluate the potential impact of treatment changes on distribution system DBP levels prior to the implementation of these changes, a system may consider using the Water Treatment Plant Simulation Model ( WTP Model) as a preliminary tool. This model was initially developed to support the DBP rule making process and was later revised to improve the predictive accuracy using data collected under the Information Collection Rule ( ICR). The WTP Model consists of empirical models developed from bench, pilot, and full scale treatability data. The majority of the predictive algorithms have been verified with independent data sets ( Solarik et al., 1999), and many key algorithms have been calibrated using ICR data from full scale surface water treatment plants ( Swanson et al., 2001). A description of the original model was presented by Harrington, et al. ( 1992) and is available from the USEPA's Technical Support Center in Cincinnati. The WTP Model was developed as a central tendency model, and was not specifically designed to yield site specific predictions. However, a significantly improved form of the WTP Model ( Version 2.0) currently under review by the agency will facilitate site specific calibration of the model. Extensive experiments to determine water quality characteristics are required to validate site specific model use.

In addition to simulating the effects of traditional surface water treatment processes, such as coagulation ( or lime softening), flocculation, sedimentation, and filtration, the WTP Model supports many advanced disinfection and DBP control processes, such as:

Enhanced coagulation

GAC adsorption

Microfiltration/ ultrafiltration

Nanofiltration/ reverse osmosis

Ozonation

Biological filtration

Chlorine dioxide addition The WTP Model generates predictions of bromate formation during ozonation, chlorite formation during chlorine dioxide addition, and THM, HAA, and TOX formation due to free chlorine and chloramine addition. These predictions are generated at the effluent of each unit treatment process and within the distribution system ( detention times are required as inputs). The WTP Model also calculates CT values achieved for the various disinfectants used during treatment and log inactivation values for virus, Giardia, and Cryptosporidium. Thus, the Significant Excursion Guidance Manual Proposal Draft July 2003 A 10 program can be used to evaluate the relative effects of treatment modifications on disinfection and DBP formation.

References Bichsel, Y., and Von Gunten U., 2000. Environmental Science and Technology, 34 ( 13): 2784 Harrington, G. W., Z. K. Chowdhury, and D. M. Owen. 1992. Journal of the American Water Works Association, 84( 11): 78.

Hozalski, R. M., and E. J. Bouwer, 1999. Biofiltration for removal of natural organic matter. In Formation and control of disinfection by products in drinking water. Singer, P. C. ( editor) American Water Works Association, Denver, CO.

Hoigne J., and H. Bader. 1988. The formation of trichloronitromethane ( chloropicrin) and chloroform in a combined ozonation/ chlorination treatment of drinking water. Water Resources. 22 ( 3): 313.

Jacangelo, J. G.. 1999. Control of disinfection by products by pressure driven membrane processes. In Formation and control of disinfection by products in drinking water. Singer, P. C. ( editor) American Water Works Association, Denver, CO.

James, M. S. 1999. " Disinfection by products: an historical perspective." In Formation and control of disinfection by products in drinking water. Singer, P. C. ( editor) American Water Works Association, Denver, CO.

Letterman, R. D., A. Amirtharajah, and C. R. O'Melia. 1999. Coagulation and flocculation. In Water quality and treatment. 5th edition. Letterman R. D. technical editor, American Water Works Association, McGraw Hill, New York, NY.

Malley, J. P., J. P. Shaw, and J. D. Ropp. 1995. Evaluation of by products produced by treatment of groundwaters with ultraviolet irradiation. AWWA Research Foundation Report and AWWA, Denver CO.

Owen et al., 1998. Removal of DBP precursors by GAC adsorption. AWWA Research Foundation Report No. 90744, Denver CO.

Krasner S. W., 1999. Chemistry of disinfection by product formation, In Formation and control of disinfection by products in drinking water. Singer, P. C. ( editor) American Water Works Association, Denver, CO. Significant Excursion Guidance Manual Proposal Draft July 2003 A 11 Reckhow, D. A., P. C. Singer, and R. L. Malcom. 1990. Chlorination of humic materials: byproduct formation and chemical interpretations. Environmental Science and Technology. 24( 11): 1655.

Singer, P. C. and D. A. Reckhow. 1999. Chemical oxidation. In Water quality and treatment. 5th edition. Letterman R. D. technical editor, American Water Works Association, McGraw Hill, New York, NY.

Singer, P. C. ( editor) 1999. Formation and control of disinfection by products in drinking water. American Water Works Association, Denver, CO.

Singer, P. C., and G. W. Harrington. 1993. Coagulation of DBP precursors: theoretical and practical considerations. Conference proceedings, AWWA Water Quality Technology Conference, Miami, FL.

Snoeyink, V. L., Kirisits, M. J., C. Pelekani, 1999. " Adsorption of disinfection by product precursors." In Formation and control of disinfection by products in drinking water. Singer, P. C. ( editor) American Water Works Association, Denver, CO.

Solarik, G., R. S. Summers, J. Sohn, W. J. Swanson, Z. K. Chowdhury, and G. Amy. 1999. Extensions and verification of the Water Treatment Plant Model for DBP formation. Conference proceedings, 1999 American Chemical Society Conference, Anaheim, CA.

Song, R. P., P. Westerhoff, R. Minear, and G. L. Amy. 1997. Journal of the American Water Works Association, 89( 6): 69.

Swanson, W. J., Z. Chowdhury, R. Summers, and G. Solarik. 2001. Predicting DBPs at full scale: calibration and validation of the Water Treatment Plant Model using ICR data. Conference proceedings, 2001 AWWA Annual Conference, Washington, DC.

Taylor J. S., Wiesner M., 1999. Membranes. In Water quality and treatment. 5th edition. Letterman R. D. technical editor, American Water Works Association, McGraw Hill, New York, NY.

USEPA, 1999. Alternative disinfectants and oxidants guidance manual. EPA 815 R 99 014.


EPA BIOPESTICIDES AND POLLUTION PREVENTION DIVISION COMPANY NOTICE OF
FILING FOR PESTICIDE PETITIONS PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER

EPA Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention

TEMPLATE

Natural Industries, Inc.

Petition Number:  9F7587

	EPA has received a pesticide petition (9F7587) from Natural Industries,
Inc., 6223 Theall Rd., Houston, TX 77066 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 to establish an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance for the microbial pesticide Paecilomyces
fumosoroseus strain FE 9901 in or on vegetable and herb crops.

	Pursuant to section 408(d)(2)(A)(i) of  FFDCA, as amended, Natural
Industries, Inc. has submitted the following summary of information,
data, and arguments in support of their pesticide petition. This summary
was prepared by Natural Industries, Inc. and EPA has not fully evaluated
the merits of the pesticide petition. The summary may have been edited
by EPA if the terminology used was unclear, the summary contained
extraneous material, or the summary unintentionally made the reader
conclude that the findings reflected EPA’s position and not the
position of the petitioner.

I. Natural Industries, Inc. Petition Summary (9F7587)

NoFly™ WP a mycoinsecticide to control whiteflies on agricultural food
crops grown in greenhouses.

Acute toxicity/pathogenicity studies conducted with NoFly™ Technical
(60.0% active ingredient) showed no adverse effects by any route of
exposure.  Paecilomyces fumosoroseus strain FE 9901 can’t grow and
develop at human and other mammal body temperatures (35˚C or above).
Additionally, acute pulmonary and acute injection toxicity studies
showed that Paecilomyces fumosoroseus strain FE 9901 is not pathogenic,
not infectious and showed minimal persistence in rats.

D. 	Aggregate Exposure.  Dietary exposure:  food.  Residues of
Paecilomyces fumosoroseus strain FE 9901 are not expected to occur since
it degrades rapidly in sun light and in high temperatures, which are
common in greenhouses.  Any remaining residues will wash off during the
processing of the food.

ow or persist at temperature above 35˚C or above.

F.	Safety Determination

=

9ns and does not persist in temperatures 	above 35˚C.  The organism
also rapidly degrades in sunlight. Any remaining 	microorganisms will be
washed off with common food processing 	procedures.

	2. Infants and children. There are no safety concerns for using
Paecilomyces fumosoroseus strain FE 9901 on food crops for infants and
children. The organism can’t grow or infect humans and does not
persist in temperatures above 35˚C.  The organism also rapidly degrades
in sunlight. Any remaining microorganisms will be washed off with common
food processing procedures.

G. 	Effects on the Immune and Endocrine Systems:  There are no reported
adverse effects to the immune or endocrine systems from Paecilomyces
fumosoroseus strain FE 9901.

H. 	Existing Tolerances:  There are no existing tolerances for
Paecilomyces fumosoroseus strain FE 9901 in the United States.

I. 	International Tolerances:  There are no existing international
tolerances for Paecilomyces fumosoroseus strain FE 9901.

 PAGE

 2


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 72 (Monday, April 17, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 18154]
[FR Doc No: 2017-07611]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID: FEMA-2017-0011; 1660-0011]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Debt Collection Financial Statement

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency, as part of its
continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites
the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity
to comment on a revision of a currently approved information
collection. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
this notice seeks comments concerning the collection of information
related to disaster program accounts and debts owed to FEMA by
individuals.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before June 16, 2017.

ADDRESSES: To avoid duplicate submissions to the docket, please use
only one of the following means to submit comments:
    (1) Online. Submit comments at www.regulations.gov under Docket ID
FEMA-2017-0011. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
    (2) Mail. Submit written comments to Docket Manager, Office of
Chief Counsel, DHS/FEMA, 500 C Street SW., 8NE., Washington, DC 20472-
3100.
    All submissions received must include the agency name and Docket
ID. Regardless of the method used for submitting comments or material,
all submissions will be posted, without change, to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov, and will include any
personal information you provide. Therefore, submitting this
information makes it public. You may wish to read the Privacy Act
notice that is available via the link in the footer of
www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jackie Cohen, Chief, Debt Management
Unit, FEMA Finance Center, Office of the Chief Financial Officer, FEMA
at<PHONE_NUMBER>. You may contact the Records Management Division for
copies of the proposed collection of information at email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the Debt Collection Improvement Act as
amended (Pub. L. 104-134), the Federal Claims Collection Standards (31
CFR parts 900-904) and DHS regulations (6 CFR 11); the Administrator of
FEMA is: (1) Required to attempt collection of all debts owed to the
United States arising out of activities of FEMA; and (2) for debts not
exceeding $100,000, authorized to compromise such debts or terminate
collection action completely where it appears that that the person
liable for such debt does not have the present or prospective financial
ability to pay a significant sum, or that the cost of collecting such
debt is likely to exceed the amount of recovery (31 U.S.C. 3711(a)(2)).
FEMA is revising this collection by requesting additional information
on FEMA Form 127-0-1 including the debtor's phone number and detailed
information concerning the debtor's dependents, including age,
relationship, and contribution to the household income, if any.
Additionally, FEMA has incorporated Household Expense Listing form
questions such as other monthly gross income, monthly housing & utility
expenses, monthly transportation expenses, etc.

Collection of Information

    Title: Debt Collection Financial Statement.
    Type of Information Collection: Revision of a currently approved
information collection.
    OMB Number: 1660-0011.
    FEMA Forms: FEMA Form 127-0-1, Debt Collection Financial Statement.
    Abstract: FEMA may request debtors to provide personal financial
information on FEMA Form 127-0-1 concerning their current financial
position. FEMA uses this information to determine whether to
compromise, suspend, or completely terminate collection efforts on
respondents' debts. This information is also used to locate debtor's
assets if the debts are sent for judicial enforcement.
    Affected Public: Individuals or households.
    Number of Respondents: 300.
    Number of Responses: 300.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 225 hours.
    Estimated Cost: The estimated annual cost to respondents for the
hour burden is $7,632.00. There are no annual costs to respondents'
operations and maintenance costs for technical services. There are no
annual start-up or capital costs. The cost to the Federal Government is
$62,644.00.

Comments

    Comments may be submitted as indicated in the ADDRESSES caption
above. Comments are solicited to (a) evaluate whether the proposed data
collection is necessary for the proper performance of the agency,
including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b)
evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (c) enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) minimize the burden
of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including
through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection techniques or other forms of information
technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    Dated: April 5, 2017.
Tammi Hines,
Records Management Program Chief (Acting), Mission Support, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2017-07611 Filed 4-14-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-19-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 137 (Wednesday, July 17, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 34075-34077]
[FR Doc No: 2019-15108]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0474; Airspace Docket No. 19-AEA-2]
RIN 2120-AA66

Proposed Amendment of Air Traffic Service (ATS) Routes in the
Vicinity of Glens Falls, NY

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend VHF Omnidirectional Range (VOR)
Federal airways V-91, V-123, V-431, V-489, and V-496 due to the planned
decommissioning of the Glens Falls, NY, VORTAC navigation aid which
provides navigation guidance for segments of the routes. The Glens
Falls VORTAC is being decommissioned as part of the FAA's VOR Minimum
Operational Network (MON) program.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 3, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590; telephone: 1
(800) 647-5527 or<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify FAA Docket No. FAA-
2019-0474; Airspace Docket No. 19-AEA-2 at the beginning of your
comments. You may also submit comments through the internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
    FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and
subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the
Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of FAA Order 7400.11C at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go
to http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Gallant, Airspace Policy Group,
Office of Airspace Services, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the
efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority as it would modify the VOR Federal airway route structure in
the eastern United States to maintain the efficient flow of air
traffic.

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they
may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
    Communications should identify both docket numbers (FAA Docket No.
FAA-2019-0474; Airspace Docket No. 19-AEA-2 and be submitted in
triplicate to the Docket Management Facility (see ``ADDRESSES'' section
for address and phone number). You may also submit comments through the
internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
on this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following

statement is made: ``Comments to FAA Docket No. FAA-2019-0474; Airspace
Docket No. 19-AEA-2''. The postcard will be date/time stamped and
returned to the commenter.
    All communications received on or before the specified comment
closing date will be considered before taking action on the proposed
rule. The proposal contained in this action may be changed in light of
comments received. A report summarizing each substantive public contact
with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRM's

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's web page at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see ``ADDRESSES'' section for address and phone number) between
9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal
holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal
business hours at the office of the Eastern Service Center, Federal
Aviation Administration, Room 210, 1701 Columbia Ave., College Park, GA
30337.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document proposes to amend FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 13, 2018, and effective
September 15, 2018. FAA Order 7400.11C is publicly available as listed
in the ADDRESSES section of this proposed rule. FAA Order 7400.11C
lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service
routes, and reporting points.

The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 to amend VOR Federal airways V-91, V-123,
V-431, V-489, and V-496 due to the planned decommissioning of the Glens
Falls, NY, VORTAC. The proposed changes are described below.
    V-91: V-91 currently extends between the intersection of the
Calverton, NY, VOR/DME 180[deg] radial, and the Hampton, NY, VORTAC
223[deg] radial; and the Burlington, VT, VOR/DME. The FAA proposes to
remove the route segments between the Albany, NY, VORTAC, and
Burlington, VT. As amended, V-91 would extend between the intersection
of the above Calverton and Hampton radials; and Albany, NY. Alternative
routing between Albany and Burlington, VT, is available via V-542 from
Albany to Cambridge, NY, then V-487 to Burlington.
    V-123: V-123 currently extends between the intersection of the
Washington, DC, VOR/DME 065[deg] radial, and the Baltimore, MD, VORTAC
197[deg] radial; and the Glens Falls, NY, VORTAC. This proposal would
remove the segment between the Cambridge, NY, VOR/DME and Glens Falls.
As amended, V-123 would extend between the intersection of the above
Washington, DC, and the Baltimore, MD, radials; and the Cambridge, NY,
VOR/DME.
    V-431: V-431 currently extends between the intersection of the
Boston, MA, VOR/DME 015[deg] radial, and the Gardner, MA, VOR/DME
097[deg] radial; and the intersection of the Glens Falls, NY, VORTAC
286[deg] radial, and the Albany, NY, VORTAC 350[deg] radial. This
proposal would remove the segments between the Gardner, MA, VOR/DME,
and the intersection of the Glens Falls, NY 286[deg] and the Albany, NY
350[deg] radials. The amended route would extend between the
intersection of the Boston, MA, VOR/DME 015[deg] radial, and the
Gardner, MA, VOR/DME 097[deg] radial; and Gardner, MA.
    V-489: V-489 currently extends between the intersection of the
Sparta, NJ, VORTAC 300[deg] radial and the Huguenot, NY, VOR/DME
196[deg] radial; and Glens Falls, NY VORTAC. This proposal would remove
the segment between the Albany, NY, VORTAC and Glens Falls, NY. As
amended V-489 would extend between the intersection of the Sparta, NJ,
300[deg] radial and the Huguenot, NY, 196[deg] radial; and Albany, NY.
    V-496: V-496 currently extends between the Utica, NY, VORTAC, and
the Kennebunk, ME, VOR/DME. This proposal would remove the segments
between Utica, NY, and the Lebanon, NH VOR/DME. As amended, V-496 would
extend between Lebanon, NH, and Kennebunk, ME. For alternative routing
between Utica, NY, and Lebanon, NH, flights could use V-490 from Utica,
to Cambridge, NY, then V-542 from Cambridge to Lebanon.
    Domestic VOR Federal airways are published in paragraph 6010(a) of
FAA Order 7400.11C, dated August 13, 2018, and effective September 15,
2018, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The VOR
Federal airways listed in this document would be subsequently published
in the Order.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulatory Policies and Procedures
(44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation
of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal.
Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic
procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this proposed rule,
when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies
and Procedures'' prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1   [Amended]

0
 2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order
7400.11C, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 13,
2018, and effective September 15, 2018, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6010(a) Domestic VOR Federal Airways.

* * * * *

V-91 [Amended]

    From INT Calverton, NY, 180[deg] and Hampton, NY, 223[deg]
radials; Calverton; Bridgeport, CT; to Albany, NY.

V-123 [Amended]

    From INT Washington, DC, 065[deg] and Baltimore, MD, 197[deg]
radials, via INT Washington, DC, 065[deg] and Woodstown, NJ,
230[deg] radials; Woodstown; Robbinsville, NJ; INT Robbinsville
044[deg] and LaGuardia, NY, 213[deg] radials; LaGuardia; INT
LaGuardia 032[deg] and Carmel, NY, 157[deg] radials; Carmel; INT
Carmel 344[deg] and Albany, NY, 181[deg] radials; Albany; to
Cambridge, NY.

V-431 [Amended]

    From INT Boston, MA, 015[deg]and Gardner, MA, 097[deg] radials,
to Gardner, MA.

V-489 [Amended]

    From INT Sparta, NJ, 300[deg] and Huguenot, NY, 196[deg]
radials; Huguenot; INT Huguenot 008[deg] and Albany, NY, 209[deg]
radials; to Albany, NY.

V-496 [Amended]

    From Lebanon, NH; to Kennebunk, ME.
* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, on July 8, 2019.
Rodger A. Dean Jr.,
Manager, Airspace Policy Group.
[FR Doc. 2019-15108 Filed 7-16-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 164 (Thursday, August 25, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52381-52382]
[FR Doc No: 2022-18334]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP22-1134-000.
    Applicants: Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Flex Fuel Filing on 8-19-22 to
be effective 9/1/2022.
    Filed Date: 8/19/22.
    Accession Number: 20220819-5051.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/31/22.

    Docket Numbers: RP22-1135-000.
    Applicants: Stingray Pipeline Company, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Updates Related to Quality to
be effective 9/19/2022.
    Filed Date: 8/19/22.
    Accession Number: 20220819-5054.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/31/22.

    Docket Numbers: RP22-1136-000.
    Applicants: Cadeville Gas Storage LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Cadeville Gas Storage LLC
Revisions to

FERC Gas Tariff to be effective 8/19/2022.
    Filed Date: 8/19/22.
    Accession Number: 20220819-5065.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/31/22.

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

    Dated: August 19, 2022.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-18334 Filed 8-24-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 41 (Monday, March 2, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 12284]
[FR Doc No: 2020-04232]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

    Docket Numbers: RP20-543-000.
    Applicants: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Rate Schedules LSS and SS-2
Tracker Filing effective February 1, 2020 to be effective 2/1/2020.
    Filed Date: 2/24/20.
    Accession Number: 20200224-5112.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/9/20.

    Docket Numbers: RP20-544-000.
    Applicants: Equitrans, L.P.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rate Agreement--
Arsenal Amendment to be effective 3/1/2020.
    Filed Date: 2/25/20.
    Accession Number: 20200225-5002.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/9/20.

    Docket Numbers: RP20-545-000.
    Applicants: Lucid Energy Delaware, LLC, Devon Gas Services, L.P.
    Description: Joint Petition for Limited Waivers, et al. of Lucid
Energy Delaware, LLC, et al. under RP20-545.
    Filed Date: 2/24/20.
    Accession Number: 20200224-5154.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/2/20.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified date(s). 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: February 25, 2020.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-04232 Filed 2-28-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: October 11, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 196)]
[Notices]
[Page 59759-59760]
[DOCID:fr11oc06-54]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP06-629-000]

Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline, L.L.C.; Notice of Proposed
Changes in FERC Gas Tariff

October 4, 2006.
    Take notice that on September 29, 2006, Maritimes & Northeast
Pipeline, L.L.C. (Maritimes) tendered for filing as part of its FERC
Gas Tariff, First Revised Volume No. 1, Tenth Revised Sheet No. 11, to
become effective on November 1, 2006.
    Maritimes states that it is making this Fuel Retainage Quantity
(FRQ) filing pursuant to section 20 of the General Terms and Conditions
(GT&C) of its FERC Gas Tariff. For deliveries north of the Richmond, ME
Compressor Station Maritimes is proposing a decrease of 0.02% to the
Fuel Retainage Percentage (``FRP'') for the Winter Period and a
decrease of 0.01% for the Non-Winter Period. The projected FRP for
deliveries north of the Richmond, ME Compressor Station for the Winter
Period is 1.00% and for the Non-Winter Period the FRP is 0.88%. For
deliveries south of the Richmond, ME Compressor Station Maritimes is
proposing a decrease of 0.06% to the Fuel Retainage Percentage (FRP)
for the Winter Period and a decrease of 0.04% for the Non-Winter
Period. The projected FRP for deliveries south of the Richmond, ME
Compressor Station for the Winter Period is 1.04% and for the Non-
Winter Period the FRP is 0.91%.
    Maritimes also states that it is submitting the calculation of the
FRQ Deferred Account amount, pursuant to Section 20 of the GT&C, which
provides that Maritimes will calculate surcharges or refunds designed
to amortize the net monetary value of the balance in the

FRQ Deferred Account at the end of the previous accumulation period.
    Maritimes states that for the period August 1, 2005 through July
31, 2006, the FRQ Deferred Account resulted in a net credit balance of
$1,641,748.73, inclusive of carrying charges, that will be refunded to
Maritimes' customers.
    Maritimes states that copies of this filing were mailed to all
affected customers of Maritimes and interested state commissions.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing 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). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of
Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210).
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is 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 docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-16800 Filed 10-10-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


			  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

		        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

			  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

			          WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation on May 13, 2004

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST 1997-2172

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Applicant:  SERVICIOS ESPECIALES del PACIFICO JALISCO, S.A. de C.V.
        Date Filed: April 22, 2004

Relief requested:  Exemption from 49 USC section 41301 to permit the
applicant to continue to conduct passenger charter operations between
Mexico and the United States, and other passenger charter operations in
accordance with 14 CFR Part 212, using small equipment.

If renewal, date and citation of last action:  May 27, 2003, in this
Docket.

Applicant representative:  Lee A. Bauer,<PHONE_NUMBER>         DOT
analyst:  Allen F. Brown,<PHONE_NUMBER>

Responsive pleadings:  None.

	DISPOSITION

Action:  Approved.
              Action date:  May 13, 2004

Effective dates of authority granted:  May 13, 2004, through May 27,
2005.

Basis for approval (bilateral agreement/reciprocity):  United
States-Mexico Air Transport Services Agreement of August 15, 1960, as
amended and extended (Agreement).

Except to the extent exempted/waived, this authority is subject to the
terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:  Standard exemption
conditions.

Special conditions/Partial grant/Denial basis/Remarks:  In the conduct
of these operations, the carrier must adhere to all applicable
provisions of the U.S.-Mexico Agreement.  In the conduct of these
operations, the carrier may only use aircraft capable of carrying no
more than 60 passengers and having a maximum payload capacity of no more
than 18,000 pounds (small equipment).  The above grant includes
authority to conduct Third and Fourth Freedom charter operations.  While
we have subjected, consistent with the provisions of the Agreement,
Mexican carriers conducting charter operations with large aircraft to
prior approval or submission of notice for their Third and Fourth
Freedom charters, we determined that any such requirement was not
necessary on public interest grounds in this case, since the carrier
will be conducting these operations solely with small aircraft.  (Other
charter operations to/from the United States under this authority,
however, are subject to prior approval under 14 CFR Part 212.)  Further,
we are continuing to allow Mexican carriers conducting passenger
charters using small equipment to make stopovers in the United States in
the conduct of such operations.

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director

		      Office of International Aviation

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (2) the applicant was qualified to perform its proposed
operations; (3) grant of the authority was consistent with the public
interest; and (4) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.
To the extent not granted/deferred/dismissed, we denied all requests in
the referenced Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority
granted in this Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR
§385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date
of issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and
the filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 18 (Friday, January 29, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7551-7552]
[FR Doc No: 2021-01972]

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

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: EC21-38-000.
    Applicants: Imperial Valley Solar 2, LLC.
    Description: Imperial Valley Solar 2, LLC submits the Amendment to
Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the Federal Power
Act and Request for Expedited Consideration.
    Filed Date: 1/21/21.
    Accession Number: 20210121-5195.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/31/21.

    Docket Numbers: EC21-46-000.
    Applicants: Acorn I Energy Storage, LLC, PPA Grand Johanna LLC,
Wildcat I Energy Storage, LLC.
    Description: Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the
Federal Power Act of Acorn I Energy Storage, LLC, et. al.
    Filed Date: 1/22/21.
    Accession Number: 20210122-5224.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/12/21.

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

    Docket Numbers: EG21-74-000.
    Applicants: Silverstrand Grid, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of EWG Status of
Silverstrand Grid, LLC.
    Filed Date: 1/22/21.
    Accession Number: 20210122-5228.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/12/21.

    Docket Numbers: EG21-75-000.
    Applicants: Ventura Energy Storage, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification as an Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of Ventura Energy Storage, LLC.
    Filed Date: 1/21/21.
    Accession Number: 20210121-5439.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/11/21.

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

    Docket Numbers: ER11-4443-003; ER11-3670-002; ER16-1689-002.
    Applicants: AK Electric Supply LLC, ArcelorMittal Cleveland LLC,
ArcelorMittal USA LLC.
    Description: Notice of Change in Status of AK Electric Supply LLC,
et al.
    Filed Date: 1/21/21.
    Accession Number: 20210121-5417.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/11/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-2858-004.
    Applicants: East Coast Power Linden Holding, L.L.C.
    Description: Compliance filing: Compliance to 401 to be effective
10/1/2019.
    Filed Date: 1/25/21.
    Accession Number: 20210125-5172.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/16/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-936-000.
    Applicants: Whitetail Solar 2, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Reactive Power Compensation
Filing to be effective 1/26/2021.
    Filed Date: 1/25/21.
    Accession Number: 20210125-5091.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/16/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-937-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc., Ameren
Illinois Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2021-01-25_SA 2880 Att A-
Proj Spec No. 6 WVPA-EnerStar-Marshall to be effective 3/27/2021.
    Filed Date: 1/25/21.
    Accession Number: 20210125-5104.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/16/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-938-000.
    Applicants: Florida Power & Light Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: FPL and Seminole Rate
Schedule No. 327 Revisions to Exhibit A to be effective 1/1/2021.
    Filed Date: 1/25/21.

    Accession Number: 20210125-5113.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/16/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-939-000.
    Applicants: Covanta Fairfax, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Notice of Cancellation to be
effective 5/31/2015.
    Filed Date: 1/25/21.
    Accession Number: 20210125-5191.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/16/21.

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

    Dated: January 25, 2021.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-01972 Filed 1-28-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P