                            Responsiveness Summary

Introduction 	 	A Notice of Intent to Delete for the Old Esco Manufacturing Superfund Site was published in the Federal Register on July 27, 2018, (83 FR 35581).  The publication of this notice was intended to inform the public that EPA planned to delete the Site from the National Priorities List, and provide a 30-day public comment period on the proposed deletion.  The closing date for comments on the Notice of Intent to Delete was August 27, 2018.  EPA received one comment in support and no adverse comments on the Notice of Intent to Delete. The comment is available in the Information Repositories.

Responsiveness Summary

      The Responsiveness Summary has been prepared to provide responses to comments submitted to EPA during the 30-day public comment period regarding the Notice of Intent to Delete (83 FR 35581) of the Old Esco Manufacturing Superfund Site.  The original comment and EPA's response is below, at http://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-SFUND-2008-0084, with the support materials under document type "Public Submissions", and at the information repositories at the following addresses: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, TX 75202-2733; City of Greenville Municipal Bldg., 2821 Washington Street, Greenville, TX 75401.

Comments Received: One anonymous comment was received and is as follows:   Good  Response:  EPA appreciates the commenter's support of the proposed deletion of the Old Esco Manufacturing Site from the National Priorities List.  EPA believes it is still appropriate to delete the site, and will proceed with the deletion action.       .


[Federal Register: December 30, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 250)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 79760]
[DOCID:fr30de08-33]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R10-OAR-2007-0915; FRL-8747-8]

Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans: Oregon;
Salem Carbon Monoxide Nonattainment Area; Designation of Areas for Air
Quality Planning Purposes

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the State of Oregon for the Salem carbon monoxide
(CO) nonattainment area. On August 9, 2007, the State of Oregon
submitted a request to EPA that the Salem nonattainment area be
redesignated to attainment for the CO National Ambient Air Quality
Standard (NAAQS) and concurrently submitted a maintenance plan to
provide for continued attainment of the CO NAAQS. The Salem CO
nonattainment area has not violated the 8-hour CO NAAQS since 1985. In
accordance with the requirements of the Federal Clean Air Act (the
Act), EPA is proposing to approve Oregon's redesignation request and
SIP revision because the State adequately demonstrates that
requirements for redesignation are met and that the Salem area will
maintain air quality standards for CO.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 29, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R10-
OAR-2007-0915, by any of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Mail: Claudia Vergnani Vaupel, U.S. EPA Region 10, Office
of Air, Waste and Toxics (AWT-107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900,
Seattle, WA 98101.
     Hand Delivery/Courier: U.S. EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth
Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98101. Attention: Claudia Vergnani
Vaupel, Office of Air, Waste and Toxics, AWT-107. Such deliveries are
only accepted during normal hours of operation, and special
arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.

Please see the direct final rule which is located in the Rules section
of this Federal Register for detailed instructions on how to submit
comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Claudia Vergnani Vaupel at telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or the
above EPA, Region 10 address.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For further information, please see the
direct final action, of the same title, which is located in the Rules
section of this Federal Register. EPA is approving the State's SIP
revision as a direct final rule without prior proposal because EPA
views this as a noncontroversial SIP revision and anticipates no
adverse comments. A detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in
the preamble to the direct final rule. If EPA receives no adverse
comments, EPA will not take further action on this proposed rule.
    If EPA receives adverse comments, EPA will withdraw the direct
final rule and it will not take effect. EPA will address all public
comments in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. EPA
will not institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties
interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time.
Please note that if we receive adverse comment on an amendment,
paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed
from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.

    Dated: November 21, 2008.
Elin D. Miller,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.
 [FR Doc. E8-30822 Filed 12-29-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 74 (Friday, April 17, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21293-21294]
[FR Doc No: 2015-08927]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Submission Deadline for Schedule Information for Los
Angeles International Airport, O'Hare International Airport, San
Francisco International Airport, John F. Kennedy International Airport,
and Newark Liberty International Airport for the Winter 2015 Scheduling
Season

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

ACTION: Notice of submission deadline.

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

SUMMARY: Under this notice, the FAA announces the submission deadline
of May 21, 2015, for winter 2015-2016 flight schedules at Los Angeles
International Airport (LAX), Chicago's O'Hare International Airport
(ORD), San Francisco International Airport (SFO), New York's John F.
Kennedy International Airport (JFK), and Newark Liberty International
Airport (EWR) in accordance with the International Air Transport
Association (IATA) Worldwide Slot Guidelines. The deadline coincides
with the schedule submission deadline for the IATA Slot Conference for
the winter 2015 scheduling season.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA has designated LAX, ORD, and SFO as
IATA Level 2 airports and JFK and EWR as IATA Level 3 airports. The FAA
currently limits scheduled operations at JFK and EWR by Order until a
final Slot Management and Transparency Rule for LaGuardia Airport, John
F. Kennedy International Airport, and Newark Liberty International
Airport (RIN 2120-AJ89) becomes effective but not later than October
29, 2016.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Operating Limitations at John F. Kennedy International
Airport, 73 FR 3510 (Jan. 18, 2008) as amended 79 FR 16854 (March
26, 2014); Operating Limitations at Newark Liberty International
Airport, 73 FR 29550 (May 21, 2008) as amended 79 FR 16857 (March
26, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA is primarily concerned about planned passenger and cargo
operations and other regularly conducted commercial operations during
peak hours, but carriers may submit schedule plans for the entire day.
At ORD, the peak hours are 0700 to 2100 Central Time (1300 to 0300
UTC), at LAX and SFO from 0600 to 2300 Pacific Time (1400 to 0700 UTC),
and at EWR and JFK from 0600 to 2300 Eastern Time (1100 to 0400 UTC).
Carriers should submit schedule information in sufficient detail
including, at a minimum, the operating carrier, flight number,
scheduled time of operation, frequency, and effective dates. IATA
standard schedule information format and data elements (Standard
Schedules Information Manual or SSIM) may be used.
    The U.S. winter scheduling season for these airports is from
October 25, 2015, through March 26, 2016, in recognition of the IATA
northern winter period. The FAA understands there may be differences in
slot times due to different U.S. daylight saving time dates and will
accommodate these differences to the extent possible.
    At LAX, there will be runway construction during the winter
scheduling season. The FAA is reviewing the potential changes to the
runway capacity and other operational impacts of the construction
projects.

DATES: Schedules must be submitted no later than May 21, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Schedules may be submitted by mail to the Slot
Administration Office, AGC-200, Office of the Chief Counsel, 800
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; facsimile:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
or by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Pfingstler, System Operations
Services, Air Traffic Organization, Federal Aviation Administration,
600 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone number:
202-267-6462; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

    Issued in Washington, DC, on April 10, 2015.
Mark W. Bury,
Assistant Chief Counsel for Regulations.
[FR Doc. 2015-08927 Filed 4-16-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 121 (Monday, June 24, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37870-37873]
[FR Doc No: 2013-14962]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-69782; File No. SR-ISE-2013-38]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange,
LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change Related to Market Maker
Risk Parameters and Complex Orders

June 18, 2013.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on June 5, 2013, the International Securities Exchange, LLC (the
``Exchange'' or the ``ISE'') 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 by the
Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments
on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to mitigate market maker risk by requiring
market makers to enter values in the Exchange-provided risk parameters
and by limiting the types of complex orders that can leg-into the
regular market. The text of the proposed rule change is available on
the Exchange's Web site www.ise.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 Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The self-regulatory organization 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, Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    On [sic] Pursuant to ISE Rule 722 and 804, the Exchange currently
provides functionality that will automatically remove a market maker's
quotes in all series of an options class when certain parameter
settings are triggered. Specifically, there are four parameters that
can be set by market makers on a class-by-class basis. These parameters
are available for market maker quotes in single options series and for
market maker quotes in complex instruments on the complex order book.
Market makers establish a time frame during which the system
calculates: (1) The number of contracts executed by the market maker in
an options class; (2) the percentage of the total size of the market
maker's quotes in the class that has been executed; (3) the absolute
value of the net between contracts bought and contracts sold in an
options class, and the absolute value of the net between (a) calls
purchased plus puts sold, and (b) calls sold plus puts purchased. The
market maker establishes limits for each of these four parameters, and
when the limits are exceeded within the prescribed time frame, the
market makers quotes are removed.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Exchange is proposing certain non-substantive changes to
the text of Rules 722 and 804 for clarity. The changes shorten the
first sentence in Rule 804 by deleting ``if the market maker trades,
in the aggregate across all series of an options class during a
specified time period'' and to delete ``(established by the market
maker), within a time frame specified by the market maker'' as the
text might be confusing in its current form and is redundant with
other text within the Rule. To assure clarity, the Exchange also
proposes to specify that the first parameter is a number of
``total'' contracts ``in the class,'' and to specify that the fourth
parameter is a net value based on puts and calls purchased and sold
``in the class.'' Finally, the Exchange proposes to use a uniform
construction of ``the specified . . .'' for each of the four
parameters. The same clarifying changes are also proposed with
respect to Rule 722, as the language in both rules is identical
except for the fact that Rule 722 applies to market maker quotes for
complex orders. The Exchange is not proposing to alter the operation
of the functionality, other than to make use of the parameters
mandatory.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The purpose of this functionality is to allow market makers to
provide liquidity across potentially hundreds of options series without
being at risk of executing the full cumulative size of all such quotes
before being given adequate opportunity to adjust their quotes. For
example, if a market maker can enter quotes with a size of 20 contracts
in 150 series of an options class, its total potential exposure is 3000
contracts in the options class. To mitigate the risk of executing all
3000 contracts without evaluating its positions, the market maker risk
functionality will automatically remove its quotes in all series of the
options class after it has executed a specified number of contracts
(e.g., 100) in series of that options class during a specified time
period (e.g., 5 seconds).
    To assure that all quotations are firm for their full size, the
parameter calculations occur after an execution against a market
maker's quote takes place. For example, if a market maker has set a
parameter of 100 contracts during a 5 second interval for an options
class, and has executed a total of 95 contracts in the options class
within the previous 3 seconds, a quote in a series of that class with a
size of 20 contracts continues to be firm for all 20 contracts. In this
example, an incoming order could execute all 20 contracts of the quote,
and following the execution, the total size parameter would add 20
contracts to the running total of 95. Since the total size executed
within the 5 second time frame exceeds the 100 contracts established by
the market maker for the options class, all of the market maker's
quotes in the options class would be removed. The market maker would
then enter new quotes in the class.
    Use of these risk management tools has always been voluntary under
the rules. Similarly, from a technical perspective, market makers
currently do not need to enter any values into the applicable fields,
and thus effectively can choose not to use these tools. The Exchange
proposes to amend the rule to make it mandatory for market makers to
enter values into all four of the quotation risk management parameters
for all options classes in which it enters quotes. The purpose of the
rule change is to prevent market makers from inadvertently entering
quotes without risk-management parameters. In this respect, the
Exchange notes that all ISE market makers currently use the parameters
when entering quotes. However, it is possible that a market maker could
inadvertently enter quotes without populating one or more of the risk
parameters, resulting in the member being exposed to much more risk
than it intended. Accordingly, ISE market makers have requested that
the Exchange modify the trading system to reject quotes if there are
any missing risk management values for the options class.
    While entering values into the quotation risk parameters will be
mandatory to prevent an inadvertent exposure to risk, the Exchange
notes that market makers who prefer to use their own risk-management
systems can enter values that assure the Exchange-provided parameters
will not be triggered.\4\ Accordingly, the proposal does not require
members to manage their risk using the Exchange-provided tools.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ For example, a market maker could set the value for the
total number of contracts executed in a class at a level that
exceeds the total number of contracts the market maker actually
quotes in an options class.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to amend Rule 722 to limit a potential
source of unintended market maker risk related to how the market maker
risk parameters under Rule 804 are calculated when complex orders leg-
into the regular market.\5\ As discussed above, by checking the risk
parameters following each execution in an options series, the risk
parameters allow market makers to provide liquidity across multiple
series of an options class without being at risk of executing the full
cumulative size of all such quotes. This is not the case, however, when
a complex order legs-into the market. Because the execution of each leg
is contingent on the execution of the other legs, the execution of all
the legs in the regular market is processed as a single transaction,
not as a series of individual transactions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Pursuant to ISE Rule 722(b)(3)(ii), complex orders may be
executed against bids and offers on the Exchange for the individual
legs of the complex order, provided the complex order can be
executed while maintaining a permissible ratio by such bids and
offers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For example, if individual orders to buy 10 contracts for the Jan
30 call, Jan 35 call, Jan 40 call, Jan 45, and Jan 50 calls are
entered, each is processed as it is received and the market maker
quotation parameters are calculated following the execution of each 10-
contract order. However, if a complex order to buy all five of these
strikes ten times is entered and is executed against bids and offers
for the individual series, the market maker parameters for quotes in
the regular market are calculated following the execution of all 50
contracts. In the example discussed previously, when the market maker
had set a limit of 100 contracts for the options class and had executed
95 contracts, the amount by which the next transaction might exceed 100
is limited to the largest size of its quote in a single series of the
options class. In that example, since the largest size the market maker
was quoting in any one series was 20 contracts, the market maker could
not have exceeded the 100 contract trigger by more than 15

contracts (95 + 20 = 115). With respect to a complex order with five
legs 20 times, the next transaction against the market maker's quotes
potentially could be as large as 100 contracts (depending upon whether
there are other market participants same price), creating the potential
in this example that the market maker could exceed the 100 contract
limit by 95 contracts (95 + 100 = 195) instead of 15.
    As the example demonstrates, the legging-in of complex orders
presents higher risk to market makers as compared to regular orders
being entered in multiple series of an options class in the regular
market as it allows market makers to exceed their parameters by a
greater number of contracts. Because this risk is directly proportional
to the number of legs associated with a complex order, ISE market
makers have requested that the Exchange prevent complex orders from
legging into the market if they have a large number of legs. The
Exchange therefore proposes to limit the legging functionally to
complex orders with no more than either two or three legs, as
determined by the Exchange on a class basis.\6\ The Exchange notes in
this respect that over 85% of all complex orders have only two legs and
that very few complex orders are entered with more than three legs. The
Exchange believes that the potential risk to market makers in the
regular market of allowing orders with more than three legs (in some
cases more than two legs) to leg-into the market, far out-weighs the
potential benefit of offering such functionality to a very limited
number of orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The Exchange will issue a circular to members identifying
the options classes for which legging is limited to complex orders
with two legs and those for which legging is limited to complex
order with three legs. The Exchange will provide members with
reasonable notice prior to change the limit applicable to an options
class.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Complex orders with more than three legs (in some cases more than
two legs) that could leg into the market except for the proposed
limitation will be available for execution on the complex order book.
The Exchange notes in this respect that the execution priority rules
contained in ISE Rule 722(b)(2) often prevent the execution of complex
orders that might otherwise be executable. Specifically, Rule 722(b)(2)
provides that the legs of a complex order cannot be executed at the
same price as a Priority Customer Order in the regular market unless
another leg of the order is executed at a price that is better than the
best price in the regular market.\7\ In other words, if there is a
Priority Customer Order on the book in one or more of the series of a
complex order, the net price of the complex order has to improve upon
the price that would be available if the complex order legged-into the
market. Thus, currently there can be complex orders resting on the book
that cannot leg-into the market because the permissible ratio cannot be
satisfied by the bids and offers in the regular market or because there
are Priority Customer Orders in the regular market in one or more of
the series of the complex order that prevent its execution.
Accordingly, the Exchange believes that preventing orders with more
than three legs (in some cases more than two legs) from legging-into
the market does not create any unusual circumstances on the complex
order book. The Exchange further notes that priority of complex orders
on the complex order book is not impacted by the proposed rule
change.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Pursuant to ISE Rule 100(a)(37A) and (37B), a Priority
Customer Order is an order for the account of a person or entity
that (i) is not a broker or dealer in securities, and (ii) does not
place more than 390 orders in listed options per day on average
during a calendar month for its own beneficial account(s).
    \8\ For example, if there are multiple complex orders for the
same strategy at the same price with four or more legs, they will be
executed pursuant to Rule 722(b)(3) (i.e., in time priority or pro-
rata bases on size (with or without Priority Customer priority)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the the [sic] Act\9\ in general, and furthers the objectives of
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act\10\ in particular, in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism for a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public
interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that requiring market makers to enter values
into the risk parameters provided by the Exchange will not be
unreasonably burdensome, as all ISE market makers currently utilize the
functionality. Moreover, the Exchange is proposing this rule change at
the request of its market makers to reduce their risk of inadvertently
entering quotes without populating the risk parameters. As discussed
above, the Exchange will be modifying the trading system to
automatically reject quotations unless the parameters are populated
with values, which will protect market makers from inadvertent exposure
to excessive risk. Reducing such risk will enable market makers to
enter quotations with larger size, which in turn will benefit investor
through increased liquidity for the execution of their orders. Such
increased liquidity benefits investors because they receive better
prices and because it lowers volatility in the options market.
    The Exchange also believes it is reasonable to limit the types of
complex orders that are eligible to leg-into the market. In this
respect, the Exchange notes that the vast majority of complex orders
consist of only two legs, which will be unaffected by this rule change.
Moreover, the Exchange believes that the potential risk of continuing
to offer legging functionality for complex orders with more than three
legs (in some cases with more than two legs) limits the amount of
liquidity that market makers are willing to provide in the regular
market. In particular, market makers may reduce the size of their
quotations in the regular market because they are at risk of executing
the cumulative size of their quotations across multiple options series
without an opportunity to adjust their quotes. Accordingly, reducing
market maker risk in the regular market by limiting the legging
functionality to orders with no more than three legs (in some cases
with no more than two legs) will benefit investors by encouraging
additional liquidity in the regular market. This benefit to investors
far exceeds the small amount of potential liquidity provided by the few
complex orders that have more than three legs (in some case more than
two legs).

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

    The proposed rule change does not impose any burden on competition.
The proposed rule change to make it mandatory for market makers to
populate the quotation risk management parameters is being made at the
request of ISE market makers to prevent the inadvertent entry of quotes
without risk-management parameters. Market makers who prefer to use
their own risk-management systems can enter out-of-range values so that
the Exchange-provided parameters will not be triggered. Accordingly,
the proposal does not require members to manage their risk using an
Exchange-provided tool. The proposed change to limit legging
functionality to complex orders of no more than three legs (in some
cases no more than two legs) will reduce risk to market makers that are
quoting in the regular market. As such, the proposal may encourage
market makers to increase the size of their quotations, thereby adding
liquidity on the Exchange.

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

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any unsolicited written comments from members or other interested
parties.

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

    Within 45 days of the publication date of this notice or within
such longer period (1) as the Commission may designate up to 45 days of
such date if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and
publishes its reasons for so finding or (2) as to which the self-
regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    (a) By order approve or disapprove such Proposed Rule Change; or
    (b) institute proceedings to determine whether the Proposed Rule
Change should be disapproved.

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-ISE-2013-38 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2013-38. 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 also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the ISE. 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-ISE-2013-38 and should be
submitted on or before July 15, 2013.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-14962 Filed 6-21-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 102 (Tuesday, May 30, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24703-24704]
[FR Doc No: 2017-11166]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-ORD-2015-0765; FRL-9963-33-ORD]

Request for Nominations of Experts to the EPA Office of Research
and Development's Board of Scientific Counselors; Correction

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published a
notice seeking nominations for technical experts to serve on its Board
of Scientific Counselors (BOSC), a federal advisory committee to the
Office of Research and Development (ORD) in the Federal Register on May
25, 2017. An error in the date for submitting nominations via the BOSC
Web site is identified and corrected in this action.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Any member of the public needing
additional information regarding this Notice and Request for
Nominations may contact Mr. Tom Tracy, Office of Science Policy, Office
of Research and Development, Mail Code 8104-R, Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460; via phone/
voice mail at:<PHONE_NUMBER>; via fax at:<PHONE_NUMBER>; or via email
at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>General information concerning the BOSC can be
found at the following Web site: https://www.epa.gov/bosc.

Correction

    In the notice FR Doc. 2017-10672, published in the issue of
Thursday, May 25, 2017 (82 FR 24120), make the following correction:
    On page 24121, in the third column, first full paragraph, in the
ninth line, remove the date ``July 21, 2017'' and add in its place the
date ``June 30, 2017''.

    Dated: May 25, 2017.
Nicole Owens,
Director, Office of Regulatory Management Division.
[FR Doc. 2017-11166 Filed 5-25-17; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 191 (Wednesday, October 4, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68599-68600]
[FR Doc No: 2023-22025]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER23-2929-000]

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

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Amcor Storage LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with
an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a
request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice

and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is October 18, 2023.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically may mail similar pleadings to
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in docketed
proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225
Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) using
the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission at [email protected] or call toll-free,
(886) 208-3676 or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    The Commission's Office of Public Participation (OPP) supports
meaningful public engagement and participation in Commission
proceedings. OPP can help members of the public, including landowners,
environmental justice communities, Tribal members and others, access
publicly available information and navigate Commission processes. For
public inquiries and assistance with making filings such as
interventions, comments, or requests for rehearing, the public is
encouraged to contact OPP at<PHONE_NUMBER> or [email protected].

    Dated: September 28, 2023.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-22025 Filed 10-3-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 243 (Wednesday, December 22, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 72606-72607]
[FR Doc No: 2021-27696]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2021-P-0375]

Determination That Alcohol and Dextrose Injection, 5 Milliliters/
100 Milliliters, 5 Grams/100 Milliliters; and 10 Milliliters/100
Milliliters, 5 Grams/100 Milliliters, Were Withdrawn From Sale for
Reasons of Safety or Effectiveness

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA, Agency, or we) has
determined that Alcohol and Dextrose Injection, 5 milliliters (mL)/100
mL, 5 gram (g)/100 mL; and Alcohol and Dextrose Injection, 10 mL/100
mL, 5 g/100 mL, were withdrawn from sale for reasons of safety or
effectiveness. The Agency will not accept or approve abbreviated new
drug applications (ANDAs) for Alcohol and Dextrose Injection, 5 mL/100
mL, 5 g/100 mL; and 10 mL/100 mL, 5 g/100 mL.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kaetochi Okemgbo, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, Rm. 6272, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 240-
825-9944, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 505(j) of the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 355(j)) allows the submission of
an ANDA to market a generic version of a previously approved drug
product. To obtain approval, the ANDA applicant must show, among other
things, that the generic drug product: (1) Has the same active
ingredient(s), dosage form, route of administration, strength,
conditions of use, and, with certain exceptions, labeling as the listed
drug, which is a version of the drug that was previously approved; and
(2) is bioequivalent to the listed drug. ANDA applicants do not have to
repeat the extensive clinical testing otherwise necessary to gain
approval of a new drug application (NDA).
    Section 505(j)(7) of the FD&C Act requires FDA to publish a list of
all approved drugs. FDA publishes this list as part of the ``Approved
Drug Products With Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations,'' which is
known generally as the ``Orange Book.'' Under FDA regulations, drugs
are removed from the list if the Agency withdraws or suspends approval
of the drug's NDA or ANDA for reasons of safety or effectiveness or if
FDA determines that the listed drug was withdrawn from sale for reasons
of safety or effectiveness (21 CFR 314.162).
    A person may petition the Agency to determine, or the Agency may
determine on its own initiative, whether a listed drug was withdrawn
from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness. This determination
may be made at any time after the drug has been withdrawn from sale,
but must be made prior to approving an ANDA that refers to the listed
drug (Sec.  314.161 (21 CFR 314.161)). FDA may not approve an ANDA that
does not refer to a listed drug.
    Between 1938 and 1968, FDA evaluated NDAs solely on the basis of
safety information. In 1962, the Kefauver-Harris Drug Amendments (Pub.
L. 87-781) amended the FD&C Act to require that new drug products also
be shown to be effective in order to obtain approval of an NDA. After
the enactment of the Kefauver-Harris Drug Amendments, FDA initiated the
Drug Efficacy Study Implementation (DESI) to evaluate the effectiveness
of drug products that had been approved between 1938 and 1962 solely on
the basis of safety.
    FDA introduced the concept of an ``abbreviated new drug
application'' in 1968 as a vehicle for approval of certain drugs
affected by the DESI review. When a drug product subject to the DESI
review was determined to be effective for one or more indications, FDA
would issue a Federal Register notice for that drug product describing
the DESI review findings and stating whether abbreviated new drug
applications that met specified criteria could be submitted to FDA (see
generally 35 FR 11273 (July 14, 1970); 35 FR 6574 (April 24, 1970)) for
products that had not been marketed under an NDA. Such a finding
allowed manufacturers to submit an abbreviated new drug application in
lieu of an NDA. For approval of these applications, which were
submitted before the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration
Act of 1984 (Hatch-Waxman Amendments) (Pub. L. 98-417) created the
current ANDA pathway, FDA relied on the evidence of effectiveness that
had been provided, reviewed, and accepted during the DESI process and
evaluated the safety of these drug products on the basis of information
included in NDAs submitted prior to 1962, as well as the subsequent
marketing experience with the drugs. These applications are referred to
as pre-Hatch-Waxman abbreviated new drug applications or ``PANDAs''.\1\
PANDAs were submitted under section 505(b) of the FD&C Act and approved
for safety and effectiveness under section 505(c) of the FD&C Act (see
86 FR 44731 at 44732 (August 13, 2021)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See ``Drug Products Approved in Abbreviated New Drug
Applications Before the Enactment of the Hatch-Waxman Amendments;
Establishment of a Public Docket; Request for Comments,'' 86 FR
44731 (August 13, 2021). Note that the scope of the referenced
notice is limited to drug products approved in PANDAs under section
505 of the FD&C Act prior to the Hatch-Waxman Amendments; the notice
does not cover applications for antibiotic drug products that were
originally submitted under section 507 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C.
357).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As explained above, the current ANDA pathway is described in
section 505(j) of the FD&C Act. Because of substantive differences in
the application approval pathway for PANDAs, which were approved for
safety and effectiveness under section 505(c) of the FD&C Act, compared
to ANDAs approved under section 505(j) of the FD&C Act, FDA has
determined that PANDA products can serve as reference listed drugs for
505(j) ANDA applicants seeking to make generic versions of these
products and that there is a finding of safety and effectiveness that
may be relied upon for approval by applicants of 505(b)(2)
applications.
    Alcohol and Dextrose Injection, 5 mL/100 mL, 5 g/100 mL; and 10 mL/
100 mL, 5 g/100 mL, is the subject of NDA 004589, held by B. Braun
Medical Inc. The initial application, which included Alcohol and
Dextrose Injection, 5 mL/100 mL, 5 g/100 mL, was allowed to take effect
on February 21, 1942. Alcohol and Dextrose Injection, 10 mL/100 mL, 5
g/100 mL, was allowed to take effect in a supplemental application on
January 17, 1946. On July 28, 1972, FDA published a Federal Register
notice regarding the DESI review of NDA 004589 (see 37 FR 15184). Under
the DESI review, FDA concluded that there was substantial evidence of
efficacy for two formulations of 5 percent Alcohol and 5 percent
Dextrose for the indication ``for increasing caloric intake.'' Based on
the Federal Register notice, FDA approved Alcohol and Dextrose
Injection, 5 mL/100 mL, 5 g/100 mL in three PANDAs: ANDA 083263, held
by Hospira, Inc. and initially approved on February 26, 1974; ANDA
083483, held by Miles Laboratories Inc. and originally approved on
November 22, 1974; and

ANDA 083256, held by Baxter Healthcare Corp. and initially approved on
March 12, 1976.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The Orange Book refers to the Alcohol and Dextrose
Injection, 5 mL/100 mL, 5 g/100 mL products in the three PANDAs
(i.e., ANDA 083263, ANDA 083483, and ANDA 083256) as Alcohol ``in''
Dextrose, but these products contain the same concentrations of
alcohol and dextrose as Alcohol and Dextrose Injection, 5 mL/100 mL,
5 g/100 mL, approved under NDA 004589. Our findings are limited to
these products, which contain both alcohol and dextrose, and we make
no findings about the safety or effectiveness of any product that
may contain only one of the active ingredients.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    All Alcohol and Dextrose Injection products have been discontinued
and moved to the ``Discontinued Product List'' section of the Orange
Book. In a letter dated June 23, 1999, Miles Laboratories Inc. notified
FDA that Alcohol and Dextrose Injection, 5 mL/100 mL, 5 g/100 mL, the
subject of ANDA 083483, was being discontinued, and FDA moved the drug
product to the ``Discontinued Drug Product List'' section of the Orange
Book. In the Federal Register of September 22, 1999, FDA announced it
was withdrawing approval of ANDA 083256, effective September 22, 1999
(see 64 FR 51325). Approval of ANDA 083256 was withdrawn upon request
of Baxter Healthcare Corp. under Sec.  314.150(c) (21 CFR 314.150(c))
because the product was no longer being marketed. In the Federal
Register of June 19, 2014, FDA announced it was withdrawing approval of
ANDA 083263, effective July 21, 2014 (see 79 FR 35170). Approval of
ANDA 083263 was withdrawn upon request of Hospira, Inc., under Sec.
314.150(c) because the product was no longer being marketed. In the
Federal Register of October 13, 2015, FDA announced it was withdrawing
approval of NDA 004589, effective November 15, 2015 (see 80 FR 61426).
Approval of NDA 004589 was withdrawn upon request of B. Braun Medical
Inc. under Sec.  314.150(c) because the products were no longer being
marketed.
    Celerity Pharmaceuticals, LLC submitted a citizen petition dated
April 12, 2021 (Docket No. FDA-2021-P-0375), under 21 CFR 10.30,
requesting that the Agency determine whether B. Braun Medical Inc.'s
Alcohol and Dextrose Injection, 10 mL/100 mL, 5 g/100 mL, NDA 004589,
was withdrawn from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness.
Although the citizen petition did not address the 5 mL/100 mL, 5 g/100
mL strength or the PANDAs, that strength and the PANDAs have also been
withdrawn from sale. On our own initiative, we have also determined
whether the 5 mL/100 mL, 5 g/100 mL strength under NDA 004589 and the
PANDAs were withdrawn from sale for safety or effectiveness reasons.
    The petitioner has identified no data or other information
suggesting that Alcohol and Dextrose Injection, 5 mL/100 mL, 5 g/100
mL; or 10 mL/100 mL, 5 g/100 mL, were withdrawn for reasons of safety
or effectiveness. Specifically, the petitioner states that the Alcohol
and Dextrose Injection, 10 mL/100 mL, 5 g/100 mL, was discontinued for
unknown reasons. The petitioner also included a letter published on
November 15, 2005, in the American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy,
which describes the use of Alcohol and Dextrose Injection as a
treatment for ethylene glycol and methanol poisonings.
    We have carefully reviewed our files for records concerning the
withdrawal of Alcohol and Dextrose Injection, 5 mL/100 mL, 5 g/100 mL;
and 10 mL/100 mL, 5 g/100 mL, from sale. We have also independently
evaluated relevant literature and data for possible postmarketing
adverse events. Based on a thorough evaluation of the information we
have available to us and an evaluation of the latest version of the
drug products' approved labeling, we have determined that the drug
products would not be considered safe and effective if they were
reintroduced to the market today. Therefore, after considering the
citizen petition and reviewing Agency records and based on the
information we have at this time, FDA has determined under Sec.
314.161 that Alcohol and Dextrose Injection, 5 mL/100 mL, 5 g/100 mL;
and Alcohol and Dextrose Injection, 10 mL/100 mL, 5 g/100 mL were
withdrawn for reasons of safety or effectiveness.
    Alcohol and Dextrose Injection is indicated to provide increased
caloric intake. The use of Alcohol and Dextrose raises several safety
concerns because there are many risks associated with the exposure to
alcohol. Alcohol is contraindicated for use in patients with neurologic
disorders, such as seizures, who have current or past substance abuse
problems or who are pregnant. It can cause intoxication, respiratory
depression, and disturbances in serum glucose levels. FDA-approved
alternatives for intravenous calorie supplementation that do not
include alcohol were approved after these Alcohol and Dextrose products
and are available today.
    In addition to the safety considerations, we have concerns about
the appropriateness of Alcohol and Dextrose Injection to provide
intravenous nutrition. Alcohol and Dextrose Injection was developed
prior to the advent of more physiologically complete intravenous
nutrition options. Parenteral nutrition, delivered intravenously, is
used as a source of nutrition when oral or enteral nutrition cannot be
administered. Parenteral nutrition is an admixture of solutions
containing dextrose, amino acids, electrolytes, vitamins, minerals, and
trace elements. Lipid emulsions are infused separately or added to the
mixture, which allows for high energy supply with iso-osmolar
solutions. Providing an adequate proportion of the energy needs as
lipids obviates the need for high glucose infusion rates and,
therefore, can contribute to the prevention of hepatic steatosis and
hyperglycemia. Lipid emulsions are also necessary to supply essential
fatty acids. Today, there are several FDA-approved parenteral products
that are alternatives to Alcohol and Dextrose for increasing caloric
intake and that also address other nutritional needs.
    Because new clinical studies would first need to be conducted to
address the concerns described above, FDA has determined that these
Alcohol and Dextrose products would not be considered safe and
effective if they were reintroduced to the market. Therefore, under
Sec.  314.161, FDA has determined that Alcohol and Dextrose Injection,
5 mL/100 mL, 5 g/100 mL; and 10 mL/100 mL, 5 g/100 mL were withdrawn
for safety and effectiveness reasons. Accordingly, the Agency will
remove B. Braun Medical Inc.'s NDA 004589 for Alcohol and Dextrose
Injection, 5 mL/100 mL, 5 g/100 mL; and 10 mL/100 mL, 5 g/100 mL; Miles
Laboratory Inc.'s ANDA 083483 for Alcohol and Dextrose Injection, 5 mL/
100 mL, 5 g/100 mL; Baxter Healthcare Corp's ANDA 083256 for Alcohol
and Dextrose Injection, 5 mL/100 mL, 5 g/100 mL; and Hospira, Inc.'s
ANDA 083263 for Alcohol and Dextrose Injection, 5 mL/100 mL, 5 g/100 mL
from the list of drug products published in the Orange Book. FDA will
not accept or approve ANDAs that refer to these drug products.

    Dated: December 15, 2021.
Lauren K. Roth,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2021-27696 Filed 12-21-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


Bell County, Kentucky Area The Bell County area is located in rural southeastern Kentucky. Since this rural county is not defined by metropolitan statistical area ( MSA) boundaries, a comparison with adjacent or regional counties has been included. Bell 2 BELL COUNTY AREA, KENTUCKY Bell County is part of the Kentucky River Area Development District. It is located to the west of Harlan County, Kentucky, to the southeast of Knox County, to the east of Whitley County, and to the north of both Claiborne County, Tennessee and Lee County, Virginia.

Geography/ Topography Bell County has a land area of 360 square miles. It is situated in the Eastern CoalField Region of Kentucky and contains some of its most rugged topography. Both the Cumberland Gap National Historic Park and the Pine Mountain State Resort Park are located within Bell County's boundaries making it the only county in Kentucky to contain both a national park and a state park. In 1996, the Cumberland Gap Tunnel was opened to traffic traveling between Kentucky and Tennessee.

Meteorological Information Due to the close proximity of Knoxville, Tennessee, meteorological data from Knoxville was used for this Kentucky area. Wind speed/ wind direction information shows that the majority of the time for the period 1988   1992, the wind in the Bell County area came from the southwest, typically from 4 6 knots. ( See figure 1 A) The mean high temperature for July for the area from 1961 through 1990 was 85 ° F, the mean low was 64 ° F. The mean precipitation for the same period was 4.3 inches.

Planning The authority for air quality planning in the Bell County area resides with the Kentucky Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet. Transportation planning for Bell County is performed by the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet.

Air Monitoring This monitor site was established in 1992 as a special purpose monitor to collect ozone data for transport purposes. For the 2000   2002 monitoring period, the ozone monitor ( 21 013 0002) in Middlesboro, Bell County, shows an 8 hour design value of .086 parts per million ( ppm) which would be classified as a county in violation of the standard. ( See table 1 A) 3 Population Based on projections to 2001 from the 2000 census data, there are 29,873 persons living in Bell County. ( See table 1 C) That represents approximately 83 persons per square mile. The population of Bell County is approximately 63% rural with the remaining 37% living in incorporated areas. The largest cities in Bell County are Middlesboro and Pineville.

Bell County's population from 1990 through 2000 decreased by approximately 4.6% ( 31,506 to 30,060). The population is further expected to decrease by an additional 4.9% between 2000 and 2010. A review of surrounding counties indicates overall positive growth for 1990 through 2000 and for 2000 through 2010. ( See table 1 B)

Air Emissions Point source VOC emissions from Bell County were estimated at 0.16 tons per summer day ( tpsd) in 2001 which represents approximately 8% of the total 2.02 tpsd of overall VOC point source emissions from the Bell County Regional Area ( See map of area on page 1). Point source NOx emissions from Bell County were estimated at 6.84 tpsd in 2001 which represents approximately 28% of the total 24.44 tpsd of overall NOx point source emissions from the Bell County area ( See table 1 D)

Regional 2001 Point Source Emissions Point sources located within Bell County are subject to PSD requirements, CTG RACT requirements, Maximum Achievable Control Technology ( MACT) requirements for sources of Hazardous Air Pollutants and New Source Performance Standards ( NSPS). VOC Emissions tons per summer day Harlan 0% Knox 0% Whitley 0% Pulaski 38% Leslie 2%

Laurel 52% Bell 8%

Clay 0% NOx Emissions tons per summer day Harlan 0% Knox 0% Whitley 0% Pulaski 71%

Leslie 1% Laurel 0% Bell 28%

Clay 0% 4 Onroad mobile source VOC emissions from Bell County were estimated at 1.74 tpsd in 2001. Onroad mobile source NOx emissions from Bell County were estimated at 2.58 tpsd in 2001 ( See table 1 D)

Commuting traffic from other counties within into Bell County is minimal, and the commuting traffic from Bell County into other counties is minimal.

Commuting Classifications Not Significant 0 10% Minimal 11 30% High 31 50% Significant 51% or more Conclusion and Recommendation Although Bell County recorded a violation of the 8 hour ozone standard based on 2000  2002 monitoring data, NOAA's Hysplit back trajectory modeling analyses indicate that ozone transport may be responsible. Therefore, Bell County should not be designated nonattainment for the 8 hour ozone standard since it is not able to control any upwind pollution impacting its air quality ( Please see enclosed Hysplit back trajectory model information).

While it is Kentucky's opinion that Bell County is impacted by other regional emissions, the fact remains the county is registering a violation of the 8 hour ozone standard. Therefore, Kentucky is requesting that if Bell County is designated nonattainment that a designation of a Rural Transport Area as described in Section 182 of the Clean Air Act be given. Bell County is a rural area that does not include, and is not adjacent to, any part of a metropolitan statistical area or consolidated metropolitan statistical area. Sources of VOC and NOx emissions within the area do not make a significant contribution to the ozone concentrations measured in the area. 5 Bell County, Kentucky Area Figure 1 A Wind Rose Patterns Figure 1 B 2001 Bell County Regional Area Point Source VOC and NOx Emissions ( tons per summer day)

0.16 6.84 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.05 0.01 0.04 0.19 0.77 17.4 0 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Bell Clay Harlan Knox Laurel Leslie Pulaski Whitley VOC NOx 6 Table 1 A Ozone Design Values ( parts per million)

County 2000 2001 2002 Design Value Kentucky Bell .090 .077 .091 .086 Pulaski .087 .077 .081 .081 Tennessee Knoxville Area Anderson .093 .085 .099 .092 Blount .096 .086 .102 .094 Knox .100 .090 .098 .096 Sevier ( GSM) .096 .091 .103 .096 Sevier ( CD) .100 .093 .101 .098 Eastern Tennessee Sullivan ( B) .092 .085 .093 .090 Sullivan ( K) .097 .086 .093 .092 Table 1 B Bell County Regional Area Population Growth Data County 1990 2000 % Growth 1990   2000 2010 % Growth 2000   2010 Bell 31,506 30,060  4.6% 28,588  4.9%

Clay 21,746 24,556 12.9% 27,615 12.5%

Harlan 36,574 33,202  9.2% 29,893  10.0%

Knox 29,676 31,795 7.1% 33,751 6.2%

Laurel 43,438 52,715 21.4% 63,370 20.2%

Leslie 13,642 12,401  9.1% 10,999  11.3%

Pulaski 49,489 56,217 13.6% 63,228 12.5%

Whitley 33,326 35,865 7.6% 38,411 7.1%

Overall Growth 39.7% 32.2% 7 Table 1 C 2001 Estimated Bell County Regional Area Population Kentucky Estimated Population Bell County 29,873 Clay County 24,506 Harlan County 32,683 Knox County 31,717 Laurel County 53,691 Leslie County 12,315 Pulaski County 56,774 Whitley County 36,466 Total Estimated Population 278,025 Table 1 D 2001 Bell County Regional Area VOC and NOx Emissions ( tons per summer day)

VOC NOx County Point Mobile Total Point Mobile Total Bell 0.16 1.74 1.90 6.84 2.58 9.42 Clay 0.00 0.00 Harlan 0.00 0.00 Knox 0.00 0.00 Laurel 1.05 0.01 Leslie 0.04 0.19 Pulaski 0.77 17.40 Whitley 0.00 0.00 Total Emissions 2.02 24.44


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 110 (Monday, June 9, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 32871-32873]
[FR Doc No: 2014-13309]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2014-0155]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone, Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway; Morehead City, NC

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on the
waters of the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway at Morehead City, North
Carolina. The safety zone is necessary to provide for the safety of
mariners on navigable waters during maintenance on the U.S. 70 Fixed
Bridge crossing the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, mile 203.7, at
Morehead City, North Carolina. The safety zone will temporarily
restrict vessel movement within the designated area.

DATES: This rule is effective from 11 p.m. on July 19, 2014 to 5 a.m.
on April 25, 2015. This rule will be enforced daily from 11 p.m.
through 5 a.m. from July 19, 2014 to April 25, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble are part of docket
[USCG-2014-0155]. To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type the
docket number in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rulemaking. You may also
visit the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground
floor of the Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email LCDR Evelynn B. Samms, U.S. Coast Guard Sector North
Carolina; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If
you have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket,
call Cheryl Collins, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone
(202) 366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms

DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

A. Regulatory History and Information

    A Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was published on April 01, 2014 in
the Federal Register (79 FR 18245). We received no comments on the
proposed rule. No public meeting was requested, and none was held.

B. Basis and Purpose

    North Carolina Department of Transportation has awarded a contract
to FREYSSINET, INC of Sterling, Virginia to perform bridge maintenance
on the U.S. 70 Fixed Bridge crossing the Atlantic Intracoastal
Waterway, mile 203.7, at Morehead City, North Carolina. Concrete
demolition, repair, shotcreting work and bridge bearing repair will
commence on July 19, 2014 with a completion date of April 25, 2015. The
contractor will utilize a 40 foot by 60 foot barge as a work platform
and for equipment staging. This safety zone will provide a safety
buffer to transiting vessels as bridge repairs present potential
hazards to mariners and property due to reduced horizontal clearance.
Due to the need to protect mariners from the hazards associated with
the bridge maintenance, vessel traffic will be temporarily restricted
from transiting within the area. In addition, during this period the
Coast Guard will require a two hour notification to the work supervisor
for passage through the U.S. 70 Fixed Bridge along the Atlantic
Intracoastal Waterway, mile 203.7, Morehead City, North Carolina. The
bridge notification requirement will apply during the maintenance
period for vessels requiring a horizontal clearance of greater than 40
feet.

C. Discussion of the Final Rule

    The temporary safety zone will encompass the waters directly under
the U.S. 70 Fixed Bridge crossing the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway,
mile 203.7, at Morehead City, North Carolina (34[deg]43'16'' N,
076[deg]41'37'' W). In the interest of public safety, general
navigation within the safety zone will be restricted during the
specified date and times. Except for vessels authorized by the Coast
Guard Captain of the Port or his representative, no person or vessel
may enter or remain in the regulated area. All vessels transiting this
section of the waterway requiring a horizontal clearance of greater
than 40 feet will be required to make a two hour advanced notification
to the work supervisor while the safety zone is in effect. This zone
will be in effect daily, 11 p.m. until 5 a.m., from July 19, 2014
through April 25, 2015.

D. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on these statutes and executive orders.

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as
supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or
under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders. This rule does not
restrict traffic from transiting the designated portion of the Atlantic
Intracoastal Waterway, it imposes a two hour notification to ensure the
waterway is clear of impediment to allow passage to vessels requiring a
horizontal clearance of greater than 40 feet.

2. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    This rule would affect the following entities, some of which may be
small entities: The owners or operators of commercial tug and barge
companies, recreational and commercial fishing vessels intending to
transit the specified portion of Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, 11
p.m. until 5 a.m., from July 19, 2014 through April 25, 2015.
    This safety zone would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons.
Although the safety zone will apply to this section of the Atlantic
Intracoastal Waterway, vessel traffic requiring a horizontal clearance
of greater than 40 feet will be able to request passage by providing a
two hour advanced notification to the work supervisor. All those
requiring less than 40 feet may pass at any time. Before the effective
period, the Coast

Guard will issue maritime advisories widely available to the users of
the waterway.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT,
above.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

4. Collection of Information

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

5. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and determined
that this rule does not have implications for federalism.

6. Protest Activities

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

7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

8. Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not cause a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.

9. Civil Justice Reform

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

10. Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.

11. Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

12. Energy Effects

    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' under Executive
Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.

13. Technical Standards

    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined
that this action is one of a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. This rule involves the establishment of a temporary safety
zone. This rule is categorically excluded from further review under
paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. An
environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination and a
Categorical Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where
indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may
lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this
rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50
U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; Pub. L. 107-
295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1.

0
2. Add temporary Sec.  165.T05-0155 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T05-0155  Safety Zone, Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway;
Morehead City, NC.

    (a) Regulated Area. The following area is a safety zone: This zone
includes the waters directly under and 100 yards either side of the
U.S. 70 Fixed Bridge crossing the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, mile
203.7, at Morehead City, North Carolina (34[deg]43'16'' N,
076[deg]41'37'' W).
    (b) Regulations. The general safety zone regulations found in 33
CFR 165.23 apply to the safety zone created by this temporary section,
Sec.  165.T05-0155. In addition the following regulations apply:
    (1) All vessels requiring greater than 40 feet horizontal clearance
to safely transit through the U.S. 70 Fixed Bridge crossing the
Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, mile 203.7, at Morehead City, North
Carolina must contact the work supervisor tender on VHF-FM marine band
radio channels 10 and 13

or at<PHONE_NUMBER> two hour in advance of intended transit.
    (2) All Coast Guard assets enforcing this safety zone can be
contacted on VHF-FM marine band radio channels 13 and 16.
    (3) The operator of any vessel within or in the immediate vicinity
of this safety zone shall:
    (i) Stop the vessel immediately upon being directed to do so by any
commissioned, warrant or petty officer on board a vessel displaying a
Coast Guard Ensign, and
    (ii) Proceed as directed by any commissioned, warrant or petty
officer on board a vessel displaying a Coast Guard Ensign.
    (c) Definitions. (1) Captain of the Port North Carolina means the
Commander, Coast Guard Sector North Carolina or any Coast Guard
commissioned, warrant or petty officer who has been authorized by the
Captain of the Port to act on his behalf.
    (2) Designated representative means any Coast Guard commissioned,
warrant, or petty officer who has been authorized by the Captain of the
Port North Carolina to assist in enforcing the safety zone described in
paragraph (a) of this section.
    (3) Work supervisor means the contractors on site representative.
    (d) Enforcement. The U.S. Coast Guard may be assisted by Federal,
State and local agencies in the patrol and enforcement of the zone.
    (e) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced daily 11 p.m.
until 5 a.m., from July 19, 2014 through April 25, 2015 unless
cancelled earlier by the Captain of the Port.

    Dated: May 19, 2014.
S.R. Murtagh,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port.
[FR Doc. 2014-13309 Filed 6-6-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: September 22, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 183)]
[Notices]
[Page 57780-57782]
[DOCID:fr22se10-70]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0639; FRL-8843-4]

2-(Hydroxymethyl)-2-nitro-1,3-propanediol (Tris Nitro); Order to
Amend Registrations to Terminate Certain Uses

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces EPA's order for the amendment to
terminate certain uses, voluntarily requested by the registrant and
accepted by the Agency, of the pesticide products listed in Table 1,
pursuant to section 6(f)(1) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), as amended. This order to terminate uses
follows a June 23, 2010 Federal Register Notice of Receipt of Request
from the Registrant listed in Table 2 to voluntarily amend 2-
(hydroxymethyl)-2-nitro-1,3-propanediol (tris nitro) product
registrations to terminate or delete one or more uses. The request
would delete use in or on metalworking fluids; latex paints; resin/
latex/polymer emulsions; specialty industrial products; livestock and
poultry premises; paints, emulsions and thickener solutions; use as a
preservative for packaged emulsions, solutions, or suspensions such as
detergents and polishes containing water; and use in pulp and paper-
mill process water systems. The request would not terminate the last 2-
(hydroxymethyl)-2-nitro-1,3-propanediol (tris nitro) products
registered for use in the United States and would result in retention
of some registered uses for those products. In the June 23, 2010
Notice, EPA indicated that it would issue an order implementing the
amendments to terminate uses, unless the Agency received substantive
comments within the 30-day comment period that would merit its further
review of these requests, or unless the registrant withdrew the
requests within this period. The Agency did not receive any comments on
the notice. Further, the registrant did not withdraw the requests.
Accordingly, EPA hereby issues in this notice, an order granting the
requested amendment to terminate uses. Any distribution, sale, or use
of the products subject to this order is permitted only in accordance
with the terms of this order, including any existing stocks provisions.

DATES:  The order is effective September 22, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Rebecca Vondem-Hagen, Antimicrobials
Division (7510P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address: vondem-
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of
interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human
health, and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry; pesticide
users; and members of the public interested in the sale, distribution,
or use of pesticides. Since others also may be interested, the Agency
has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be
affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the
applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

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

    EPA has established a docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0639. Publicly available
docket materials are available either in the electronic docket at
http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard copy, at the
Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-
4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington,
VA. The hours of operation of this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m.
to 4 p.m., Monday

through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

II. What Action is the Agency Taking?

    This notice announces the order for the amendment to terminate
uses, as requested by the registrant, of certain products registered
under section 3 of FIFRA. These registrations are listed in sequence by
registration number in Table 1 of this unit.

  Table 1.--2-(hydroxymethyl)-2-nitro-1,3-propanediol (tris nitro) Product Registration Amendments to Terminate
                                                      Uses
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Registration Number                 Product Name               Company           Uses to be Terminated
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
464-657                                Tris Nitro\TM \Solid     The Dow Chemical         Use in metalworking
                                        Industrial               Company                  fluids; Latex paints,
                                        Bacteriostat                                      Resin/latex/polymer
                                                                                emulsions; Specialty
                                                                                industrial products;
                                                                                Livestock and Poultry
                                                                                premises.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
464-658                                Tris Nitro\TM\ Brand of  The Dow Chemical         Use in metalworking
                                        50% (Aqueous) For        Company                  fluids; Latex paints;
                                        Formulating Use                                   Resin/latex/polymer
                                                                                emulsions; Specialty
                                                                                industrial products;
                                                                                Livestock and poultry
                                                                                premises.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
464-663                                Tris Nitro\TM\ Brand of  The Dow Chemical         Use in paints,
                                        50% Aqueous Tris         Company                  emulsions and
                                        (hydroxymethyl)                                   thickener solutions;
                                        nitromethane                                      use in metalworking
                                                                                fluids; Use as a
                                                                                preservative for
                                                                                packaged emulsions,
                                                                                solutions, or
                                                                                suspensions, such as
                                                                                detergents and
                                                                                polishes containing
                                                                                water.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
464-668                                Tris Nitro\TM\ Brand of  The Dow Chemical         Use in metalworking
                                        25% Aqueous Tris         Company                  fluids; use as a
                                        (hydroxymethyl)                                   preservative for
                                        nitromethane                                      packaged emulsions,
                                                                                solutions, or
                                                                                suspensions, such as
                                                                                detergents and
                                                                                polishes containing
                                                                                water.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
464-679                                Tris Nitro\TM\ Brand     The Dow Chemical         Use in paints,
                                                                 Company                  emulsions, and
                                                                                thickener solutions;
                                                                                use in metalworking
                                                                                fluids; use as a
                                                                                preservative for
                                                                                packaged emulsions,
                                                                                solutions, or
                                                                                suspensions, such as
                                                                                detergents and
                                                                                polishes containing
                                                                                water; use in pulp and
                                                                                papermill process
                                                                                water systems.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Table 2 of this unit includes the name and address of record for
the registrant of the products in Table 1 of this unit.

                Table 2.--Registrants of Amended Products
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            EPA Company Number                Company Name and Address
------------------------------------------------------------------------
464                                         The Dow Chemical Company
                                            1803 Building
                                            Midland, MI 48674
------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Summary of Public Comments Received and Agency Response to
Comments

    During the public comment period provided, EPA received no comments
in response to the Federal Register notice of June 23, 2010 (75 FR
35807) announcing the Agency's receipt of the request to voluntarily
amend registrations to terminate certain uses of products listed in
Table 1.

IV. Cancellation Order

    Pursuant to FIFRA section 6(f), EPA hereby approves the requested
amendment to terminate certain uses of 2-(Hyroxymethyl)-2-nitro-1,3-
propanediol (Tris Nitro) registrations identified in Table 1 of Unit
II. Accordingly, the Agency orders that the product registrations
identified in Table 1 of Unit II. are hereby amended to terminate the
affected uses. Any distribution, sale, or use of existing stocks of the
products identified in Table 1 of Unit II. in a manner inconsistent
with any of the provisions for disposition of existing Stocks set forth
in Unit VI., will be considered a violation of FIFRA.

V. What is the Agency's Authority for Taking this Action?

    Section 6(f)(1) of FIFRA provides that a registrant of a pesticide
product may at any time request that any of its pesticide registrations
be canceled or amended to terminate one or more uses. FIFRA further
provides that, before acting on the request, EPA must publish a notice
of receipt of any such request in the Federal Register. Thereafter,
following the public comment period, the Administrator may approve such
a request.

VI. Provisions for Disposition of Existing Stocks

     Existing stocks are those stocks of registered pesticide products
which are currently in the United States and which were packaged,
labeled, and released for shipment prior to the effective date of the
action. The existing stocks provision for the products subject to this
order is as follows.
     Once EPA has approved product labels reflecting the requested
amendments to delete uses, registrants will be permitted to sell or
distribute products under the previously approved labeling for a period
of 18 months after the date of Federal Register publication of the
order to terminate uses, unless other restrictions have been imposed.
Thereafter, registrants will be prohibited from selling or distributing
the products whose labels include the deleted uses identified in Table
1 of Unit II., except for export consistent with FIFRA section 17 or
for proper disposal.
     Persons other than the registrant may sell, distribute, or use
existing stocks of the products in Table 1, whose labels include the
deleted uses until supplies are exhausted, provided that such sale,
distribution, or use is consistent with

the terms of the previously approved labeling on, or that accompanied,
products bearing the deleted uses.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Antimicrobials, Pesticides and pests, 2-
(hydroxymethyl)-2-nitro-1,3-propanediol, Tris Nitro.

     September 14, 2010.
 Joan Harrigan Farrelly,
Director, Antimicrobials Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. 2010-23544 Filed 9-21-10; 8:45 a.m.]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S