[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 199 (Thursday, October 15, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62069-62071]
[FR Doc No: 2015-26299]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0393; FRL-9934-06]

Registration Review Interim Decisions; Notice of Availability

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of EPA's interim
registration review decisions for the pesticides listed in Unit II of
this notice. Registration review is EPA's periodic review of pesticide
registrations to ensure that each pesticide continues to satisfy the
statutory standard for registration, that is, that the pesticide can
perform its intended function without causing unreasonable adverse
effects on human health or the environment. Through this program, EPA
is ensuring that each pesticide's registration is based on current
scientific and other knowledge, including its effects on human health
and the environment. This document also announces the Agency's closure
of the registration review docket for flufenpyr-ethyl. All pesticide
products containing flufenpyr-ethyl have been cancelled.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For pesticide specific information,
contact the Chemical Review Manager identified in the table in Unit II
for the pesticide of interest.
    For general information on the registration review program,
contact: Richard Dumas, Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division (7508P),
Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:
(703) 308-8015; email address<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, farm worker, 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 pesticide specific contact person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How can I get copies of this document and other related information?

    The docket for this action, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0393, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Please review the visitor instructions and
additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. What action is the Agency taking?

    Pursuant to 40 CFR 155.58(c), this notice announces the
availability of EPA's interim registration review decision or case
closure document for the pesticides in the following table:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Registration review case name and                                                         Contact and contact
                 No.                                     Docket ID No.                          information
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carbon and Carbon Dioxide (Case       EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0705..............................  James Parker, (703)
 4019).                                                                                306-0469,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

Debacarb (2-EEEBC) (Case 4031)......  EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0802..............................  Roy Johnson, (703) 347-
                                                                                0492,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Flufenpyr-ethyl (Case 7262).........  EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0768..............................  Tracy Perry, (703) 308-
                                                                                0128,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Inorganic Nitrate-Nitrite (Case       EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-1118..............................  Brittany Pruitt, (703)
 4052).                                                                                347-0289,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Maleic Hydrazide (Case 0381)........  EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0387..............................  Ricardo Jones, (703)
                                                                                347-0493,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>                                                                                .
Soap Salts (Case 4083)..............  EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0519..............................  Tracy Perry, (703) 308-
                                                                                0128,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sulfur (Case 0031)..................  EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0176..............................  Jose Gayoso, (703) 347-
                                                                                8652,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The registration review final decisions for these cases are
dependent on the assessments of threatened and endangered (listed)
species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), determinations on the
potential for endocrine disruption, and/or pollinator risk assessments.
    Debacarb (Interim Decision). The registration review docket for
debacarb (EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0802) opened in December 2008. Debacarb is a
fungicide registered to control diseases in ornamental trees, and is
applied via injection into the tree trunk. Because of its limited use
and potential exposure, the Agency did not conduct a new human health
risk assessment during registration review. There are very little data
on adverse effects and potential routes of exposure for wildlife and
the environment, so the Agency conducted a qualitative ecological risk
assessment. The Agency concluded that debacarb does not pose risk
concerns for birds, mammals, and plants (both listed and non-listed).
Risk could not be precluded for aquatic organisms (from leaf drop into
aquatic habitats) and pollinators (from residues in pollen and nectar).
To address these concerns, the Agency proposed prohibitions on treating
trees within 20' of water bodies and before and during bloom. More
recently, in characterizing exposure, the Agency determined that the
pathway from treatment of leaves to receiving waters diluted the
potential for adverse effects in aquatic organisms. Concerns about
pollinator risks remain, and the Agency is directing the registrant to
amend labels to prohibit application before and during bloom. The
Agency will likely require pollinator data at a later time. Debacarb
has not been evaluated under the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program
(EDSP).
    Gas Cartridges; Inorganic Nitrate--Nitrite, Carbon and Carbon
Dioxide, and Sulfur (Interim Decision). Potassium and sodium nitrate,
carbon and carbon dioxide, and sulfur are ingredients in fumigant gas
cartridge products, which are available in small and large sizes. Both
sizes are registered to control burrowing mammals, but only the large
gas cartridge is registered to also control coyotes, red foxes and
skunks. Gas cartridges are registered for outdoor use only. To use the
products, the user lights the fuse, places the cartridge in the burrow
or den and seals the entrance. Animals within the burrow or den are
asphyxiated by the release of carbon dioxide and toxic gases.
    The Agency relied on a previous human health risk assessment in
making its registration review decisions and determined that no human
health risks of concern exist for these compounds. The Agency conducted
a new ecological risk assessment for the gas cartridges for
registration review. The risk assessment did find the potential for
adverse effects to a number of listed species from gas cartridge use.
EPA developed mitigation to address the risk to a number of listed
species. In most cases, the mitigation involves the use of Endangered
Species Protection Bulletins. Because the gas cartridges may contain up
to three different active ingredients compounds, these Bulletins are
available in the Inorganic Nitrate--Nitrite, Carbon and Carbon Dioxide,
and Sulfur Registration Review dockets (EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-1118, EPA-HQ-
OPP-2007-0705, and EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0176, respectively). Although
implementation of these Bulletins will address risk to some listed
species from gas cartridge use, risk to a number of other listed
species remains. Additionally, potassium and sodium nitrate, carbon and
carbon dioxide, and sulfur have not been evaluated under the Endocrine
Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP). Therefore, the Agency's final
registration review decisions are dependent upon the result of ESA
Section 7 consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
and the evaluation of potential endocrine disruptor risk.
    Maleic Hydrazide (Interim Decision). The registration review docket
for maleic hydrazide (EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0387) opened in September 2009.
Maleic hydrazide is a systemic plant growth regulator registered for
use on tobacco, potato, onions, non-bearing citrus, turf, utility and
highway rights-of-way, airports, industrial land, lawns, recreational
areas, ornamental/shade trees and ornamental plants. EPA published
human health and ecological risk assessments in July 2014, which
included a screening-level listed species assessment. No human health
risks of concern were identified. The ecological risk assessment
indicated potential risks to non-target terrestrial birds, terrestrial
invertebrates, and certain species of semi-aquatic and terrestrial
monocotyledonous plants. To address findings of the maleic hydrazide
registration review, the Agency is reducing maximum application rates
for certain uses, requiring additional data on chronic avian effects,
and requiring label clarifications. Maleic hydrazide has not been
evaluated under the EDSP nor has the EPA completed an ESA section 7
consultation with the USFWS and the National Marine and Fisheries
Service (the Services). Therefore, the Agency's final registration
review decision is dependent upon the result of the evaluation of
potential endocrine disruptor risk and consultation with the Services
for potential risk to listed species.
    Soap Salts (Interim Decision). The registration review docket for
soap salts (EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0519) opened in September 2008. Soap salts
are used as acaricides, herbicides, and insecticides on food and non-
food crops in various settings, chiefly residential and agricultural.
Ammonium and sodium soap salts are also used as animal repellants. EPA
published draft human health and ecological risk assessments in March
2013 for a 60-day public comment period. In March 2015, EPA published a
revised ecological risk assessment and the Soap Salts Proposed Interim
Registration Review Decision for a 60-day public comment period. In
this Soap Salts Interim Decision, the Agency has determined that no
additional data are required and no changes to the affected
registrations or their labeling are needed at this time. The Agency's

final registration review decision for soap salts will depend upon the
results of an ESA section 7 consultation with the services, an EDSP
determination, and an assessment of the non-target exposure to bees.
    Sulfur (Interim Decision). The registration review docket for
sulfur (EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0176) opened in March 2008. Sulfur is used as
an insecticide and fungicide on a wide range of field and greenhouse-
grown food and feed crops, livestock, livestock quarters, and indoor
and outdoor residential sites. Sulfur is also registered for use in gas
cartridge products, along with inorganic nitrate/nitrite, carbon, and
carbon dioxide. EPA has conducted a qualitative assessment for both
human health and ecological risks, including listed species, for
sulfur. Details of the assessment for the gas cartridge use are
summarized under the gas cartridge heading in this unit. For uses of
sulfur other than gas cartridges, the Agency is making a ``no effect''
determination for all listed aquatic species, and a ``no effect''
determination for direct effects to listed terrestrial vertebrates that
do not rely on insects as a primary food source. However, at this time,
the Agency is not able to make a listed species determination for
effects to terrestrial invertebrates, terrestrial plants, or indirect
effects to terrestrial vertebrates with insects as a primary food
source. Sulfur has not been evaluated under the EDSP. Therefore, the
Agency's final registration review decision is dependent upon the
result of an ESA Section 7 consultation with the USFWS and the
evaluation of potential endocrine disruptor risk.
    Case Closure for Flufenpyr-ethyl (PC Code 108853; Case 7262).
Flufenpyr-ethyl is an herbicide which was labeled for post-emergence
control of broadleaf weeds in field corn, soybeans, and sugarcane. On
March 19, 2015, the Agency received a request for voluntary
cancellation of flufenpyr-ethyl from the technical and end-use product
registrant, Valent USA Corporation. EPA subsequently issued a Federal
Register notice announcing receipt of the request (FRL-9928-54) on July
8, 2015 (80 FR 39100), and allowed for a 30-day period for public
comment on the request. No comments were received, and on September 22,
2015, EPA issued the cancellation order terminating the last pesticide
products containing flufenpyr-ethyl registered in the United States (80
FR 57179) (FRL-9933-58). There were no existing stocks of these
products and no requests for existing stocks provisions. Therefore no
existing stocks provision was provided for these product registrations.
With the cancellation of these remaining products, the Agency is
announcing the closure of the registration review case for flufenpyr-
ethyl.
    Pursuant to 40 CFR 155.57, a registration review decision is the
Agency's determination whether a pesticide meets, or does not meet, the
standard for registration in FIFRA. EPA has considered the pesticides
listed in light of the FIFRA standard for registration. The interim
decision documents in the dockets describe the Agency's rationale for
issuing registration review interim decisions for these pesticides.
    In addition to the interim registration review decision documents,
the registration review docket for these pesticides also includes other
relevant documents related to the registration review of these cases.
The proposed interim registration review decisions were previously
posted to each docket and the public was invited to submit any comments
or new information.
    EPA has addressed the substantive comments or information received
during the 60-day comment period in the interim decision document for
each pesticide listed in this document.
    Pursuant to 40 CFR 155.58(c), the registration review case docket
for each pesticide discussed in this notice will remain open until all
actions required in the interim decisions have been completed.
    Background on the registration review program is provided at:
http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/registration_review. Links to earlier
documents related to the registration review of this pesticide are
provided in the Pesticide Chemical Search data base accessible at:
http://iaspub.epa.gov/apex/pesticides/f?p=chemicalsearch.

    Authority:  7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.

    Dated: September 30, 2015.
Bernard P. Keigwin, Jr.,
Director, Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division, Office of Pesticide
Programs.
[FR Doc. 2015-26299 Filed 10-14-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 214 (Friday, November 4, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68436-68437]
[FR Doc No: 2011-28591]

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

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: RP12-58-000.
    Applicants: Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America LLC.
    Description: Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America LLC submits
tariff filing per 154.204: Negotiated Rate Filing--Virginia Power to be
effective 11/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 10/26/2011.
    Accession Number: 20111026-5066.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, November 07, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: RP12-59-000.
    Applicants: Dominion Transmission, Inc.
    Description: Dominion Transmission, Inc. submits tariff filing per
154.204: DTI--October 26, 2011 Negotiated Rate Agreement to be
effective 11/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 10/26/2011.
    Accession Number: 20111026-5067.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, November 07, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: RP12-60-000.
    Applicants: Kern River Gas Transmission Company.
    Description: Kern River Gas Transmission Company submits tariff
filing per 154.204: 2011 SoCal Nonconforming Agreement Vintage to be
effective 11/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 10/26/2011.
    Accession Number: 20111026-5163.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, November 07, 2011.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing

requirements, interventions, protests, and service 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 (202) 502-
8659.

    Dated: October 27, 2011.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-28591 Filed 11-3-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 140 (Friday, July 20, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 34647]
[FR Doc No: 2018-15533]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No. 2018-10]

Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received; Air Evac
EMS, Inc.

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice contains a summary of a petition seeking relief
from specified requirements of Federal Aviation Regulations. The
purpose of this notice is to improve the public's awareness of, and
participation in, the FAA's exemption process. Neither publication of
this notice nor the inclusion or omission of information in the summary
is intended to affect the legal status of the petition or its final
disposition.

DATES: Comments on this petition must identify the petition docket
number and must be received on or before August 9, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2018-0038
using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30; U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments
from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts
these comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to http://www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
http://www.dot.gov/privacy.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140
of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Clarence Garden<PHONE_NUMBER>, Office
of Rulemaking, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue
SW, Washington, DC 20591.
    This notice is published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85.

Lirio Liu,
Executive Director, Office of Rulemaking.

Petition for Exemption

    Docket No.: FAA-2018-0038.
    Petitioner: Air Evac EMS, Inc.
    Section(s) of 14 CFR Affected: 91.411(b) and 91.413(c).
    Description of Relief Sought: Air Evac EMS, Inc. (Air Evac), holder
of Air Carrier Certificate #EVCA731D, requests an exemption from
Sec. Sec.  91.411(b) and 91.413(c) of Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations. The proposed exemption, if granted, would allow Air Evac
to perform testing on aircraft that are not included in its Air Carrier
operation. Such testing would be conducted by qualified, trained, Air
Frame & Power Plant technicians and would be documented.

[FR Doc. 2018-15533 Filed 7-19-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


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

>

<EPA Registration Division contact: [Bethany Benbow<PHONE_NUMBER>]>

<>

<FMC Corporation, 1735 Market Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103>

<[1F7839]>

<	EPA has received a pesticide petition (1F7839) from FMC
Corporation,1735 Market street, Philadelphia, PA 19103, 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 180.515 by establishing
a tolerance for residues of carfentrazone-ethyl
(ethyl--2-dichloro-5-[4-(difluoromethyl)-4,5-dihydro-3-methyl-5-oxo-1
H-1,2,4-triazol-1-yl]-4-fluorobenzene-propanoate) and the metabolite
carfentrazone-ethyl chloropropionic acid (α,
2-dichloro-5-[4-(difluoromethyl)-4,5-dihydro-3-methyl-5-oxo-1H-1,2,4-tri
azol-1-yl]-4-fluorobenzenepropanoic acid)] in or on the raw agricultural
commodity [Crop Group 18 Non-grass animal feed (forage, fodder, straw
and hay): alfalfa, forage at 5 ppm; alfalfa, hay at 18 ppm; alfalfa,
seed at 10 ppm;  clover, forage at 5 ppm; clover, hay at 18 ppm;
clover, seed at 10 ppm parts per million (ppm).  EPA has determined that
the petition contains data or information regarding the elements set
forth in section 408 (d)(2) of the FDDCA; however, EPA has not fully
evaluated the sufficiency of the submitted data at this time or whether
the data supports granting of the petition. Additional data may be
needed before EPA rules on the petition.>

<A. Residue Chemistry>

<	1. Plant metabolism. [The metabolism of carfentrazone-ethyl in plants
is adequately understood.  Corn, wheat, radish and soybean metabolism
studies with carfentrazone-ethyl have shown uptake of material into
plant tissue with no significant movement into grain, root or seeds.
All four plants extensively metabolized carfentrazone-ethyl and
exhibited a similar metabolic pathway.  The residues of concern are the
combined residues of carfentrazone-ethyl and carfentrazone-ethyl-
chloropropionic acid.>

<	2. Analytical method. There is a practical analytical method for
detecting and measuring levels of carfentrazone-ethyl and its metabolite
in or on food with a limit of quantitation that allows monitoring of
food with residues at or above the levels set or proposed in the
tolerances.  The analytical enforcement method for carfentrazone-ethyl
was used with minor modification that eliminated several clean-up and
derivatization steps that was required for GC/MSD but not for
LC/MS/MS.  The analytical method for carfentrazone-ethyl involves
separate analyses for parent and its metabolite.  The parent is
analyzed by evaporation and reconstitution of the sample prior to
analysis by LC/MS/MS GC/ECD.  The metabolite samples were refluxed in
the presence of acid and cleaned up with solid phase extraction prior to
analysis by LC/MS/MS.

>

<	3. Magnitude of residues. The magnitude of the residue of
carfentrazone-ethyl and its major metabolites in/on Crop Group 18
(non-grass animal feed) representative crops alfalfa and clover treated
with Spartan Charge Herbicide were determined.  Forage/hay plots were
treated with one or two applications of carfentrazone-ethyl for a
cumulative application of 0.04 lbs ai/A. Applications to each treated
plot in this study were made using a spray solution of approximately 10
GPA. Each field trial followed one of three treatment types: single
dormant application, single stubble application or split dormant and
stubble applications. Seed plots were treated with one application of
carfentrazone-ethyl at a rate of 0.04 lbs ai/A. At maturity, seed plots
were treated with carfentrazone-ethyl at a rate of 0.06 lbs ai/A as a
harvest aid for seed samples. RAC for each crop were harvested at the
appropriate time and subsequent analyses determined that the residues of
carfentrazone-ethyl and its metabolites would not exceed the proposed
tolerances.

B. Toxicological Profile>

<	1. Acute toxicity.  Carfentrazone-ethyl demonstrates low oral, dermal
and inhalation toxicity.  The acute oral LD50 value in the rat was
greater than 5000 mg/kg, the acute dermal LD50 value in the rat was
greater than 4000 mg/kg and the acute inhalation LC50 value in the rat
was greater than 5.09 mg/L/4h.  Carfentrazone-ethyl is non-irritating to
rabbit skin and minimally irritating to rabbit eyes.  It did not cause
skin sensitization in guinea pigs.  An acute neurotoxicity study in the
rat had a systemic NOAEL of 500 mg/kg based on clinical signs and
decreased motor activity levels; the NOAEL for neurotoxicity was greater
than 2000 mg/kg (highest dose tested) based on the lack of neurotoxic
clinical signs or effects on neuropathology.>

<	2. Genotoxicty. Carfentrazone-ethyl did not cause mutations in the
Ames assay with or without metabolic activation.  There was a positive
response in the Chromosome Aberration assay without activation but a
negative response with activation.  The Mouse Micronucleus assay (an in
vivo test which also measures chromosome damage), the CHO/HGPRT forward
mutation assay and the Unscheduled DNA Synthesis assay were negative.
The overwhelming weight of the evidence supports the conclusion that
Carfentrazone-ethyl is not genotoxic.>

<	3. Reproductive and developmental toxicity. Carfentrazone-ethyl is not
considered to be a reproductive or a developmental toxin.  In the
2-generation reproduction study, the NOEL for reproductive toxicity was
greater than 4000 ppm (greater than 323 to greater than 409 mg/kg/day).
In the developmental toxicity studies, the rat and rabbit maternal NOELs
were 100 mg/kg/day and 150 mg/kg/day, respectively.  The developmental
NOEL for the rabbit was greater than 300 mg/kg/day, which were the
highest dose tested and for the rat the NOEL was 600 mg/kg/day based on
increased litter incidences of thickened and wavy ribs at 1250
mg/kg/day.  These two findings (thickened and wavy ribs) are not
considered adverse effects of treatment but related delays in rib
development which are generally believed to be reversible.>

<	4. Subchronic toxicity. Ninety-day feeding studies were conducted in
mice, rats and dogs with Carfentrazone-ethyl.  The NOEL for the mouse
study was 4000 ppm (571 mg/kg/day), for the rat study was 1000 ppm (57.9
mg/kg/day for males; 72.4 mg/kg/day for females) and for dogs was 150
mg/kg/day.  A 90-day subchronic neurotoxicity study in the rat had a
systemic NOEL of 1000 ppm (59.0 mg/kg/day for males; 70.7 mg/kg/day for
females) based on decreases in body weights, body weight gains and food
consumption at 10,000 ppm; the neurotoxicity NOEL was greater than
20,000 ppm (1178.3 mg/kg/day for males; 1433.5 mg/kg/day for females)
which was the highest dose tested.>

<	5. Chronic toxicity. Carfentrazone-ethyl is not carcinogenic to rats
or mice.  A 2-Year Combined Chronic Toxicity/Oncogenicity study in the
rat was negative for carcinogenicity and had a chronic toxicity NOEL of
200 ppm (9 mg/kg/day) for males and 50 ppm (3 mg/kg/day) for females
based on red fluorescent granules consistent with porphyrin deposits in
the liver at the 500 and 200 ppm levels, respectively.  An 18 Month
Oncogenicity study in the mouse had a carcinogenic NOEL that was greater
than 7000 ppm (>1090 mg/kg/day for males; >1296 mg/kg/day for females)
based on no evidence of carcinogenicity at the highest dose tested.  A
1-Year Oral Toxicity study in the dog had a NOEL of 50 mg/kg/day based
on isolated increases in urine porphyrins in the 150 mg/kg/day group
(this finding was not considered adverse).

Using the Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment, carfentrazone-ethyl
should be classified as Group AE@ for carcinogenicity  -- no evidence of
carcinogenicity -- based on the results of carcinogenicity studies in
two species.  There was no evidence of carcinogenicity in an 18-month
feeding study in mice and a 2-year feeding study in rats at the dosage
levels tested.  The doses tested are adequate for identifying a cancer
risk.  Thus, a cancer risk assessment is not necessary.>

<	6. Animal metabolism. The metabolism of carfentrazone-ethyl in animals
is adequately understood. Carfentrazone-ethyl was extensively
metabolized and readily eliminated following oral administration to
rats, goats, and poultry via excreta.  All three animals exhibited a
similar metabolic pathway.  As in plants, the parent chemical was
metabolized by hydrolytic mechanisms to predominantly form
carfentrazone-ethyl-chloropropionic acid, which was readily excreted.>

<	7. Metabolite toxicology. [NA ]>

<	8. Endocrine disruption. An evaluation of the potential effects on the
endocrine systems of mammals has not been determined; however, no
evidence of such effects was reported in the chronic or reproductive
toxicology studies described above.  There was no observed pathology of
the endocrine organs in these studies.  There is no evidence at this
time that carfentrazone-ethyl causes endocrine effect.>

<C. Aggregate Exposure>

<	1. Dietary exposure. Based on the available toxicity data, the EPA has
established a Reference Dose (RfD) and cPAD for carfentrazone-ethyl of
0.03 mg/kg/day.  This is based on a 2-year chronic
toxicity/carcinogenicity study in rats with a threshold No-Observed
Effect Level (NOEL) of 3 mg/kg/day and an uncertainty factor of 100.  In
support of the proposed harvest-aid application the Agency conducted
acute and chronic dietary risk assessments.  For both analysis 100%
crop-treated, default processing factors and modeled drinking water
estimates resulting from the highest registered proposed application
rate of 0.4 lbs ai/acre, tolerance- level residues for livestock, fish,
shellfish, cereal grains and cotton commodities were made.  Using the
above assumptions, the resulting acute and chronic exposure estimates
were aPAD <1% and cPAD <89% respectively.>

<	i. Food. Dietary exposure from the proposed harvest-aid application
accounts for 1.0% or less of the aPAD in subpopulations (including
infants and children).  Dietary exposure from all uses would accounts
for 89% or less of the cPAD in subpopulations (including infants and
children).>

<	ii. Drinking water. Ground water estimate of 13.4 ppb, surface water
estimates of 34.3 ppb (peak concentration) and 19.0 ppb (annual average)
were incorporated directly into the a  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 cute and
chronic dietary assessment by the Agency.>

<	2. Non-dietary exposure. Non-occupational exposures to
carfentrazone-ethyl are anticipated from the lawn, turf and aquatic
applications.  The resulting MOEs were calculated to be >500,000.>

<D. Cumulative Effects>

<	EPA is also required to consider the potential for cumulative effects
of carfentrazone-ethyl and other substances that have a common mechanism
of toxicity.  EPA consideration of a common mechanism of toxicity is not
appropriate at this time since EPA does not have information to indicate
that toxic effects produced by carfentrazone-ethyl would be cumulative
with those of any other chemical compounds; thus only the potential
risks of carfentrazone-ethyl are considered in this exposure
assessment.>

<E. Safety Determination>

<	1. U.S. population. Using the conservative exposure assumptions
described and based on the completeness and reliability of the toxicity
data, the aggregate exposure to carfentrazone-ethyl will utilize less
than 1% of the aPAD and less than 32% of the cPAD for the US
subpopulations.  EPA generally has no concern for exposures below 100
percent of the aPAD or cPAD.  Therefore, based on the completeness and
reliability of the toxicity data and the conservative exposure
assessment, there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
from aggregate exposure to residues of carfentrazone-ethyl, including
all anticipated dietary exposure and all other non-occupational
exposures.>

<	2. Infants and children. In assessing the potential for additional
sensitivity of infants and children to residues of carfentrazone-ethyl,
EPA considers data from developmental toxicity studies in the rat and
rabbit and the two-generation reproduction study in the rat.  The
developmental toxicity studies are designed to evaluate adverse effects
on the developing organism resulting from pesticide exposure during
prenatal development.  Reproduction studies provide information relating
to effects on the reproductive capacity of males and females exposed to
the pesticide.  Developmental toxicity was not observed in developmental
toxicity studies using rats and rabbits.  In these studies, the rat and
rabbit maternal NOELs were 100 mg/kg/day and 150 mg/kg/day,
respectively.  The developmental NOEL for the rabbit was greater than
300 mg/kg/day, which was the highest dose, tested and for the rat was
600 mg/kg/day based on increased litter incidences of thickened and wavy
ribs.  These two findings are not considered adverse effects of
treatment but related delays in rib development, which are generally
believed to be reversible.

In a two-generation reproduction study in rats, no reproductive toxicity
was observed under the conditions of the study at 4000 ppm, which was
the highest dose tested.

FFDCA section 408 provides that EPA may apply an additional safety
factor for infants and children in the case of threshold effects to
account for pre- and post-natal toxicity and the completeness of the
database.  Based on the current toxicological data requirements, the
database relative to pre- and post-natal effects for children is
complete and an additional uncertainty factor is not warranted.
Therefore at this time, the RfD of 0.03 mg/kg/day is appropriate for
assessing aggregate risk to infants and children.

Population Adjusted Dose (aPAD and cPAD)

Using the conservative exposure assumptions described above, the percent
of the aPAD that will be utilized by aggregate exposure to residues of
carfentrazone-ethyl for non-nursing infants (<1 year old) would be < 1%
(aPAD) and < 53% (cPAD); for children 1-6 years of age would be < 1%
(aPAD) and < 89% (cPAD), (the most highly exposed group).  Based on the
completeness and reliability of the toxicity data and the conservative
exposure assessment, there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will
result to infants and children from aggregate exposure to the residues
of carfentrazone-ethyl including all anticipated dietary exposure.>

<F. International Tolerances>

@

Ø

B*

฀There are no established Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex)
Maximum Residue Levels (MRLs) for carfentrazone-ethyl, in/on the
proposed commodities.>


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 182 (Thursday, September 19, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57673-57674]
[FR Doc No: 2013-22855]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Eighth Meeting: RTCA Special Committee 226, Audio Systems and
Equipment

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

ACTION: Meeting Notice of RTCA Special Committee 226, Audio Systems and
Equipment.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of the
eighth meeting of the RTCA Special Committee 226, Audio Systems and
Equipment.

DATES: The meeting will be held October 8-10, 2012 from 9:00 a.m.-5:00
p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at RTCA, 1150 18th Street NW.,
Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The RTCA Secretariat, 1150 18th Street
NW., Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036, or by telephone at (202) 330-
0652/(202) 833-9339, fax at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or Web site at http://www.rtca.org. In addition, Sophie Bouquet may be contacted

directly at<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., App.), notice is
hereby given for a meeting of Special Committee 226. The agenda will
include the following:
     Welcome and Administrative Remarks
     Introductions
     Agenda Overview
     Review FRAC comment
     Solicit proposals for further changes to DO-214 per FRAC
comment
     Incorporate all changes into DO-214 draft
     Final review of DO-214 and draft updates/changes
     Committee to approve final document for release to the PMC
     Adjourn
    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space
availability. With the approval of the chairman, members of the public
may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to present
statements or obtain information should contact the person listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Members of the public may
present a written statement to the committee at any time.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on September 10, 2013.
Paige Williams,
Management Analyst, NextGen, Business Operations Group, Federal
Aviation Administration.
[FR Doc. 2013-22855 Filed 9-18-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 180 (Tuesday, September 19, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 64513]
[FR Doc No: 2023-20149]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2014-0212; FMCSA-2017-0253; FMCSA-2020-0049; FMCSA-
2021-0025]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Epilepsy and
Seizure Disorders

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), Department
of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of final disposition.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to renew exemptions for five
individuals from the requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Regulations (FMCSRs) that interstate commercial motor vehicle (CMV)
drivers have ``no established medical history or clinical diagnosis of
epilepsy or any other condition which is likely to cause loss of
consciousness or any loss of ability to control a CMV.'' The exemptions
enable these individuals who have had one or more seizures and are
taking anti-seizure medication to continue to operate CMVs in
interstate commerce.

DATES: The exemptions were applicable on August 13, 2023. The
exemptions expire on August 13, 2025.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief,
Medical Programs Division, FMCSA, DOT, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590-0001,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected]. Office
hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. ET Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays. If you have questions regarding viewing or submitting
material to the docket, contact Dockets Operations,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation

A. Viewing Comments

    To view comments go to www.regulations.gov. Insert the docket
number (FMCSA-2014-0212, FMCSA-2017-0253, FMCSA-2020-0049, or FMCSA-
2021-0025) in the keyword box and click ``Search.'' Next, sort the
results by ``Posted (Newer-Older),'' choose the first notice listed,
and click ``Browse Comments.'' If you do not have access to the
internet, you may view the docket online by visiting Dockets Operations
on the ground floor of the DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays. To be sure someone is there to
help you, please call<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER> before visiting
Dockets Operations.

B. Privacy Act

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(6), DOT solicits comments
from the public on the exemption request. DOT posts these comments,
without edit, including any personal information the commenter
provides, to www.regulations.gov. As described in the system of records
notice DOT/ALL 14 (Federal Docket Management System), which can be
reviewed at https://www.transportation.gov/individuals/privacy/privacy-act-system-records-notices, the comments are searchable by the name of
the submitter.

I. Background

    On August 3, 2023, FMCSA published a notice announcing its decision
to renew exemptions for five individuals from the epilepsy and seizure
disorders prohibition in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(8) to operate a CMV in
interstate commerce and requested comments from the public (88 FR
51393). The public comment period ended on September 5, 2023, and no
comments were received.
    FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of these applicants and
determined that renewing these exemptions would likely achieve a level
of safety that is equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would
be achieved by complying with Sec.  391.41(b)(8).
    The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding epilepsy
found in Sec.  391.41(b)(8) states that a person is physically
qualified to drive a CMV if that person has no established medical
history or clinical diagnosis of epilepsy or any other condition which
is likely to cause the loss of consciousness or any loss of ability to
control a CMV.
    In addition to the regulations, FMCSA has published advisory
criteria \1\ to assist medical examiners in determining whether drivers
with certain medical conditions are qualified to operate a CMV in
interstate commerce.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ These criteria may be found in APPENDIX A TO PART 391--
MEDICAL ADVISORY CRITERIA, section H. Epilepsy: Sec.  391.41(b)(8),
paragraphs 3, 4, and 5, which is available on the internet at
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2015-title49-vol5/pdf/CFR-2015-title49-vol5-part391-appA.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Discussion of Comments

    FMCSA received no comments in this proceeding.

III. Conclusion

    Based on its evaluation of the five renewal exemption applications,
FMCSA announces its decision to exempt the following drivers from the
epilepsy and seizure disorders prohibition in Sec.  391.41(b)(8).
    As of August 13, 2023, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315(b), the following five individuals have satisfied the renewal
conditions for obtaining an exemption from the epilepsy and seizure
disorders prohibition in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (88 FR
51393):

Diego DaSilva (MA)
Jaime Dougherty (MN)
Jeffrey Douglass (ME)
Christopher Nonnenkamp (MO)
Angel Velez-Cruz (NJ)

    The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2014-0212, FMCSA-
2017-0253, FMCSA-2020-0049, or FMCSA-2021-0025. Their exemptions were
applicable as of August 13, 2023 and will expire on August 13, 2025.
    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315(b), each exemption will be valid
for 2 years from the effective date unless revoked earlier by FMCSA.
The exemption will be revoked if the following occurs: (1) the person
fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the
exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained
prior to being granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not
be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315(b).

Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2023-20149 Filed 9-18-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 155 (Thursday, August 11, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 49666-49669]
[FR Doc No: 2011-20377]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2011-0672]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; East Coast Drag Boat Bucksport Blowout Boat Race,
Waccamaw River, Bucksport, SC

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on the
waters of the Waccamaw River during the East Coast Drag Boat Bucksport
Blowout in Bucksport, South Carolina. The East Coast Drag Boat
Bucksport Blowout will consist of a series of high-speed boat races.
The event is scheduled to take place on Saturday, September 17, 2011
and Sunday, September 18, 2011. The temporary safety zone is necessary
for the safety of race participants, participant vessels, spectators,
and the general public during the event. Persons and vessels are
prohibited from entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or
remaining within the safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of
the Port Charleston or a designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 11:59 a.m. on September 17, 2011
through 7 p.m. on September 18, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2011-0672 and are available online
by going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2011-0672 in the
``Keyword'' box, and then clicking ``Search.'' They are also available
for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30),
U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 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
temporary final rule, call or e-mail Ensign John R. Santorum, Coast
Guard Sector Charleston Waterways Management

Division at telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
If you have questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright,
Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because the Coast Guard did not receive
necessary information about the event until July 5, 2011. As a result,
the Coast Guard did not have sufficient time to publish an NPRM and to
receive public comments prior to the event. Any delay in the effective
date of this rule would be contrary to the public interest because
immediate action is needed to minimize potential danger to the race
participants, participant vessels, spectators, and the general public.

Basis and Purpose

    The legal basis for the rule is the Coast Guard's authority to
establish regulated navigation areas and other limited access areas: 33
U.S.C. 1226, 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; Public Law 107-295, 116
Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
    The purpose of the rule is to protect race participants,
participant vessels, spectators, and the general public from the
hazards associated with the high-speed boat races.

Discussion of Rule

    On September 17, 2011 and September 18, 2011, the East Coast Drag
Boat Association will host the East Coast Drag Boat Bucksport Blowout,
a series of high-speed boat races. The races will take place from
approximately 11:59 a.m. until 7 p.m. on each day. The races will be
held on the waters of the Waccamaw River in Bucksport, South Carolina.
Approximately 30 high-speed power boats will be participating in the
races. The high speed of the participant vessels poses a safety hazard
to race participants, participant vessels, spectators, and the general
public.
    The safety zone encompasses certain waters of the Waccamaw River in
Bucksport, South Carolina. The safety zone will be enforced daily from
11:59 a.m. until 7 p.m. Persons and vessels are prohibited from
entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within the
safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Charleston or
a designated representative. Persons and vessels desiring to enter,
transit through, anchor in, or remain within the safety zone may
contact the Captain of the Port Charleston by telephone at 843-740-
7050, or a designated representative via VHF radio on channel 16, to
request authorization. If authorization to enter, transit through,
anchor in, or remain within the safety zone is granted by the Captain
of the Port Charleston or a designated representative, all persons and
vessels receiving such authorization must comply with the instructions
of the Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated representative.
The Coast Guard will provide notice of the safety zone by Local Notice
to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to Mariners, and on-scene designated
representatives.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

Executive Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563

    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, and does not require an
assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of
that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it
under that Order.
    The economic impact of this rule is not significant for the
following reasons: (1) The safety zone will be enforced for a total of
just over 14 hours; (2) although persons and vessels will not be able
to enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within the regulated
area without authorization from the Captain of the Port Charleston or a
designated representative, they may operate in the surrounding area
during the enforcement period; (3) persons and vessels may still enter,
transit through, anchor in, or remain within the safety zone if
authorized by the Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated
representative; and (4) the Coast Guard will provide advance
notification of the safety zone to the local maritime community by
Local Notice to Mariners and Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. 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 may affect the following entities, some of which
may be small entities: the owners or operators of vessels intending to
enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within that portion of the
Waccamaw River encompassed within the safety zone from 11:59 a.m. until
7 p.m. on September 17, 2011 and September 18, 2011. For the reasons
discussed in the Executive Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563
section above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offer to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so that they can better evaluate its
effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process.
    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.

Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under
that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for
federalism.

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 or more in any
one year. Though this rule will not result in such an expenditure, we
do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

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

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.

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.

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.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

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 concluded
this action is one of a category of actions which do not individually
or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment.
This rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph
(34)(g), of the Instruction. This rule involves the establishment of a
temporary safety zone that will be enforced for a total of just over 14
hours. An environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion
determination are available in the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES.

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. 1226, 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 a temporary Sec.  165.T07-0672 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T07-0672  Safety Zone; East Coast Drag Boat Bucksport Blowout
Boat Race, Waccamaw River, Bucksport, SC.

    (a) Regulated Area. The following regulated area is safety zone.
All waters of the Waccamaw River encompassed within an imaginary line
connecting the following points: starting at Point 1 in position
33[deg]39'11.46'' N, 79[deg]05'36.78'' W; thence west to Point 2 in
position 33[deg]39'12.18'' N, 79[deg]05'47.76'' W; thence southeast to
Point 3 in position 33[deg]38'39.48'' N, 79[deg]05'37.44'' W; thence
northeast to Point 4 in position 33[deg]38'42.3'' N, 79[deg]05'30.6''
W; thence northwest back to origin. All coordinates are North American
Datum 1983.
    (b) Definition. The term ``designated representative'' means Coast
Guard Patrol Commanders, including Coast Guard coxswains, petty
officers, and other officers operating Coast Guard vessels, and
Federal, state, and local officers designated by or assisting the
Captain of the Port Charleston in the enforcement of the regulated
area.
    (c) Regulations. (1) All persons and vessels are prohibited from
entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within the
regulated area unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Charleston
or a designated representative.
    (2) Persons and vessels desiring to enter, transit through, anchor
in, or remain within the regulated area may contact the Captain of the
Port Charleston by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or a designated
representative via VHF radio on channel 16, to request authorization.
If authorization to enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within
the regulated area is granted by the Captain of the Port Charleston or
a designated representative, all persons

and vessels receiving such authorization must comply with the
instructions of the Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated
representative.
    (3) The Coast Guard will provide notice of the regulated area by
Local Notice to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to Mariners, and on-scene
designated representatives.
    (d) Effective Date and Enforcement Periods. This rule is effective
from 11:59 a.m. on September 17, 2011 through 7 p.m. on September 18,
2011. This rule will be enforced daily from 11:59 a.m. until 7 p.m. on
September 17, 2011 and September 18, 2011.

    Dated: August 1, 2011.
M.F. White,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Charleston.
[FR Doc. 2011-20377 Filed 8-10-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: March 11, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 46)]
[Notices]
[Page 10630-10632]
[DOCID:fr11mr09-153]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-59519; File No. SR--FINRA-2009-004]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the
Definition of TRACE-Eligible Security To Include Securities Eligible
for Public Sale and Additional Securities That Are Restricted
Securities

March 5, 2009.
    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 11, 2009, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(``FINRA'') (f/k/a National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.
(``NASD'')) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC''
or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I,
II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by FINRA. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    FINRA is proposing to amend FINRA Rule 6710(a), the definition of
``TRACE-eligible security,'' to broaden the definition by deleting (i)
the requirement that a debt security be registered under the Securities
Act of 1933 (``Securities Act''); \3\ and (ii) with respect to
``restricted securities'' as that term is defined in Securities Act
Rule 144(a)(3),\4\ the requirement that such securities be issued
pursuant to Securities Act Section 4(2) \5\ prior to being resold under
Securities Act Rule 144A.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 77a et seq.
    \4\ 17 CFR 230.144(a)(3).
    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 77d(2).
    \6\ 17 CFR 230.144A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on FINRA's Web
site at http://www.finra.org, at the principal office of FINRA 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, FINRA 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. FINRA has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A,
B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    FINRA proposes to amend Rule 6710(a), the definition of ``TRACE-
eligible security,'' to eliminate two aspects of the requirement
therein that such securities be ``(1) registered under the Securities
Act; or (2) issued pursuant to Section 4(2) of the Securities Act and
purchased or sold pursuant to Securities Act Rule 144A.'' The proposed
rule change eliminates

the requirement that a TRACE-eligible security be registered under the
Securities Act,\7\ thus including more corporate debt securities, and
restates and broadens the provision applicable to ``restricted
securities'' as defined in Securities Act Rule 144(a)(3),\8\ to include
any ``restricted security'' sold pursuant to Securities Act Rule
144A.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 77a et seq.
    \8\ Securities Act Rule 144(a)(3) (17 CFR 230.144(a)(3)) defines
``restricted securities'' as:
    (i) Securities acquired directly or indirectly from the issuer,
or from an affiliate of the issuer, in a transaction or a chain of
transactions not involving any public offering; (ii) Securities
acquired from the issuer that are subject to the resale limitations
of Sec.  230.502(d) under Regulation D or Sec.  230.701(c); (iii)
Securities acquired in a transaction or chain of transactions
meeting the requirements of Sec.  230.144A; (iv) Securities acquired
from the issuer in a transaction subject to the conditions of
Regulation CE (Sec.  230.1001); (v) * * * ; (vi) Securities acquired
in a transaction made under Sec.  230.801 in the same extent and
proportion that the securities held by the security holder of the
class with respect to which the rights offering was made were, as of
the record date for the rights offering, ``restricted securities''
within the meaning of this paragraph (a)(3); (vii) Securities
acquired in a transaction made under Sec.  230.802 to the same
extent and proportion that the securities that were tendered or
exchanged in the exchange offer or business combination were
``restricted securities'' within the meaning of this paragraph
(a)(3); and (viii) Securities acquired from the issuer in a
transaction subject to an exemption under section 4(6) (15 U.S.C.
77d(6)) of the Act.
    \9\ 17 CFR 230.144A. The proposed rule change does not affect
the exclusions currently in the definition of ``TRACE-eligible
security,'' which are: (i) Debt issued by a government-sponsored
entity; and (ii) debt that is a mortgage-backed or asset-backed
security, a collateralized mortgage obligation, or a money market
instrument having a maturity at issuance of one year or less.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Debt Securities Eligible for Public Sale

    The current definition of ``TRACE-eligible security'' in Rule
6710(a) was adopted in 2002 and has not been amended. Generally, the
definition is sufficiently broad to require the reporting of, and
provide price transparency for, a substantial portion of corporate
bonds that are eligible for public sale (i.e., they are freely tradable
because they are not ``restricted securities'' as defined in Securities
Act Rule 144(a)(3)).\10\ However, FINRA has identified several
situations where corporate debt securities that are eligible for public
sale in the secondary market are trading without TRACE price
transparency. In many cases, the securities that are not subject to
TRACE are ``exempted securities'' under Section 3 of the Securities
Act.\11\ For example, transactions in corporate debt securities that
are issued subject to the jurisdiction and approval of a court of
competent jurisdiction in insolvency matters may be eligible for public
sale and not reported to TRACE because they are not registered under
the Securities Act.\12\ In addition, among others, debt securities
issued as part of an issuer exchange offer effected pursuant to
Securities Act Section 3(a)(9) \13\ and those issued by a bank or other
financial institutions under Securities Act Section 3(a)(2) \14\ (or
another subparagraph of the section) generally are not subject to TRACE
reporting and dissemination for this reason.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 230.144(a)(3).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 77c.
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 77a et seq. If an insolvent corporation is
reorganized under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, frequently
new debt securities are issued. The issuance is subject to the
approval of the trustee and the securities are not required to be
registered under the Securities Act. See, e.g., U.S. Bankruptcy
Code, 11 U.S.C. 101 et seq.
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 77c(a)(9). For example, an issuer may exchange an
issue of debt securities that are registered under the Securities
Act (and subject to both TRACE reporting and dissemination) for a
new security that is not registered in reliance upon Securities Act
Section 3(a)(9) (15 U.S.C. 77c(a)(9)), which permits such exchanges
without registration of the new security. Although the exchanged
security was TRACE-eligible, the new security is not because it is
not registered as required in Rule 6710(a).
    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 77c(a)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA proposes to amend Rule 6710(a) to remove the unnecessary
limitation on the scope of the definition of TRACE-eligible security by
deleting the phrase ``(1) registered under the Securities Act'' from
the definition. Eliminating the registration requirement will permit
TRACE to capture transaction information for all debt securities that
are eligible for public sale (and that otherwise meet the standards for
TRACE eligibility).\15\ FINRA will increase price transparency in such
corporate bonds, which FINRA believes is important because many
securities that are not registered but are eligible for public sale are
being purchased and sold by all market participants, including retail
investors. Further, FINRA's obligation to conduct surveillance in the
corporate bond market is not limited to transactions in securities that
are registered under the Securities Act.\16\ Thus, transactions in
corporate bonds that are eligible for public sale (and that otherwise
meet the standards for TRACE eligibility) will be included in the audit
trail to enhance the surveillance of the corporate bond market.\17\ In
this regard, FINRA's transaction reporting rules apply generally to any
equity security that is eligible for public sale and do not consider
registration as a factor. FINRA believes that including debt securities
that are eligible for public sale as TRACE-eligible securities is vital
to its mandate to regulate the market to promote market integrity and
to protect investors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ To be a TRACE-eligible security, a security must also be
U.S. dollar denominated, depository eligible and issued by a U.S.
and/or foreign private issuer. The credit rating (or lack of a
rating) of a security does not impact TRACE eligibility.
    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 77a et seq.
    \17\ FINRA is aware that as a result of these amendments certain
``TRACE-eligible securities'' may not be subject to the notice and
informational requirements of Rule 6760, and as a result initially
may not be included in the TRACE Issue Master. As noted in FINRA's
Trade Reporting Notice, dated February 22, 2008, if a firm has a
reporting obligation under Rule 6730 in a TRACE-eligible security
that is not included in the TRACE Issue Master, the firm must notify
FINRA immediately and provide the CUSIP and other information
necessary for FINRA to update the TRACE Issue Master and enable the
firm to promptly report the transaction to TRACE and comply with its
obligations under Rule 6730.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rule 144A Transactions

    The current definition of TRACE-eligible security requires
transaction reporting for some but not all of the large market in
corporate debt securities that are ``restricted securities,'' as
defined in Securities Act Rule 144(a)(3),\18\ sold to ``qualified
institutional buyers'' (``QIBs''), as defined in Securities Act Rule
144A(a)(1),\19\ in transactions effected pursuant to Rule 144A (``Rule
144A transactions'').\20\ Although FINRA believes that a significant
number of ``restricted securities'' that are sold in Rule 144A\21\
transactions are preceded by an offering that is exempt under
Securities Act Section 4(2),\22\ the limitation in the definition
excludes other Rule 144A\23\ transactions that should be included in
the TRACE audit trail.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 230.144(a)(3).
    \19\ 17 CFR 230.144A(a)(1).
    \20\ 17 CFR 230.144A.
    \21\ 17 CFR 230.144A.
    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 77d(2).
    \23\ 17 CFR 230.144A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA proposes to amend Rule 6710(a) to eliminate the requirement
regarding Securities Act Section 4(2) \24\ in the defined term, TRACE-
eligible security. The proposed amendment would include as TRACE
eligible a ``'restricted security' as defined in Securities Act Rule
144(a)(3)'' \25\ if it is ``sold pursuant to Securities Act Rule
144A.'' \26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 15 U.S.C. 77d(2).
    \25\ 17 CFR 230.144(a)(3).
    \26\ 17 CFR 230.144A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA believes that there is no compelling reason to exclude
corporate debt securities sold in a Rule 144A \27\ transaction from the
definition of TRACE-eligible security simply because such corporate
debt securities are issued or offered under other exemptive

provisions of the Securities Act.\28\ For example, in a global
offering, some debt securities may be issued as part of a foreign
tranche pursuant to Regulation S.\29\ Under the proposed amendment,
U.S. resales of securities from that tranche effected as Rule 144A \30\
transactions would be required to be reported to TRACE. The proposed
amendment regarding Rule 144A \31\ transactions will allow FINRA to
obtain a more complete audit trail of Rule 144A \32\ transactions in
corporate bonds. This additional transaction data will enhance the
regulatory surveillance of the corporate bond market as a whole.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ 17 CFR 230.144A.
    \28\ 15 U.S.C. 77a et seq.
    \29\ 17 CFR 230.901-905.
    \30\ 17 CFR 230.144A.
    \31\ 17 CFR 230.144A.
    \32\ 17 CFR 230.144A.
    \33\ Currently, as provided in Rule 6750, FINRA does not
disseminate Securities Act Rule 144A transactions, and FINRA does
not propose to amend Rule 6750. See e-mail from Sharon Zackula,
Associate Vice President and Associate General Counsel, FINRA, to
Geoffrey Pemble, Special Counsel, Division of Trading and Markets,
Commission, dated March 4, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA will announce the effective date of the proposed rule change
in a Regulatory Notice to be published no later than 60 days following
Commission approval. The effective date will be no later than 30 days
following publication of the Regulatory Notice announcing Commission
approval.

2. Statutory Basis

    FINRA believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,\34\ which requires, among
other things, that FINRA rules must be designed to prevent fraudulent
and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest. FINRA believes that the proposed rule change will
provide FINRA with heightened capabilities to regulate and conduct
surveillance in the corporate debt securities markets, enhance market
transparency and protect investors and other market participants by
including in TRACE certain corporate debt securities that currently are
traded in the same markets in which TRACE-eligible securities are
traded by the same market participants and investors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    FINRA does not believe that the proposed rule change would impose
any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of purposes of the Act.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve 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 e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-FINRA-2009-004 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-FINRA-2009-004. 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 the principal office of FINRA. 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-FINRA-2009-004 and should be
submitted on or before April 1, 2009.\35\

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

    \35\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. E9-5203 Filed 3-10-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P