[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 67 (Thursday, April 7, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 19290-19292]
[FR Doc No: 2011-8370]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2011-0197]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Commencement Bay, Tacoma, WA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing to amend 33 CFR 165.1305 to
expand the established safety zone during the annual Tacoma Freedom Air
Show on the fourth of July. The proposed safety zone expansion would
establish a larger clear area for low flying aircraft during this
event. This rule is necessary to help ensure the safety of the maritime
public and event participants during this annual event and will do so
by prohibiting any person or vessel from entering or remaining within
the safety zone during this event.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before May 9, 2011. Requests for public meetings must be
received by the Coast Guard on or before May 9, 2011.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2011-0197 using any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    (4) Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods.
See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on
submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or e-mail Ensign Anthony P. LaBoy, USCG Sector Puget Sound
Waterways Management Division, Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-
mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing or
submitting material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided.

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG-2011-0197), indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and material
online (via http://www.regulations.gov) or by fax, mail, or hand
delivery, but please use only one of these means. If you submit a
comment online via http://www.regulations.gov, it will be considered
received by the Coast Guard when you successfully transmit the comment.
If you fax, hand deliver, or mail your comment, it will be considered
as having been received by the Coast Guard when it is received at the
Docket Management Facility. We recommend that you include your name and
a mailing address, an e-mail address, or a telephone number in the body
of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions
regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
click on the ``submit a comment'' box, which will then become
highlighted in blue. In the ``Document Type'' drop down menu select
``Proposed Rule'' and insert ``USCG-2011-0197'' in the ``Keyword'' box.
Click ``Search'' then click on the balloon shape in the ``Actions''
column. If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit
them in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\; by 11 inches,
suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by
mail and would like to know that they reached the Facility, please
enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will
consider all comments and material received during the comment period
and may change the rule based on your comments.

Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
click on the ``read comments'' box, which will then become highlighted
in blue. In the ``Keyword'' box insert ``USCG-2011-0197'' and click
``Search.'' Click the ``Open Docket Folder'' in the ``Actions'' column.
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. We have an
agreement with the Department of Transportation to use the Docket
Management Facility.

Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received into any
of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act notice
regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for one using one of the four methods specified under
ADDRESSES. Please explain why you believe a public meeting would be
beneficial. If we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will
hold one at a time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal
Register.
    For information on facilities or services for individuals with
disabilities or to request special assistance at the public meeting,
contact Ensign Anthony P. LaBoy at the telephone number or e-mail
address indicated under the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this notice.

Basis and Purpose

    The Coast Guard is proposing to modify the boundaries of the safety
zone established in 33 CFR 165.1305. In general, this safety zone is
necessary because of the numerous potential hazards associated with the
Tacoma Freedom Fair Air Show events. The proposed modification is
necessary because the air show has expanded since the initial final
rule was codified and the event sponsor has requested a larger safety
zone to protect participants and spectators. In addition, expanding the
zone would allow safety vessels to patrol inside the safety zone and
would minimize vessel traffic along the shoreline which could impede
the movement of the safety vessels.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The safety zone created by this proposed rule encompasses all
waters bounded by the following points Latitude 47[deg]17'38'' N,
Longitude 122[deg]28'43'' W; thence south easterly to Latitude
47[deg]17'4'' N, Longitude 122[deg]27'32'' W; thence south westerly to
Latitude 47[deg]16'35'' N, Longitude 122[deg]28'1'' W; thence north
westerly along the shoreline to Latitude 47[deg]17'10'' N, Longitude
122[deg]29'14'' W; thence returning to the origin. This safety zone
resembles a rectangle protruding from the shoreline along Ruston Way.
Floating markers will be placed by the sponsor of the event to
delineate the boundaries of the safety zone. All persons and vessels
are prohibited from entering or remaining in the safety zone unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port, Puget Sound or Designated
Representative. The Captain of the Port Puget Sound may be assisted by
other local, state, and Federal agencies in the enforcement of this
safety zone.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed 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.

Regulatory Planning and Review

    This proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review,
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 Coast Guard bases this finding on the fact that the safety zone
is small in size, short in duration, and maritime traffic will be able
to safely transit the area outside of this safety zone. Maritime
traffic may also request permission to transit through the zone from
the Captain of the Port, Puget Sound or Designated Representative.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this proposed 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 proposed
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. This proposed rule would affect the following
entities, some of which might be small entities: The owners or
operators of vessels intending to enter or transit in a portion of
Commencement Bay, Tacoma, Washington on July 4th from 2 p.m. until
12:30 a.m. July 5th, annually. This safety zone will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities,
because the safety zone is short in duration, minimal in size, and
maritime traffic will be allowed to transit through the safety zone
with permission.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.

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 proposed rule so that they can better
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. 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 Ensign Anthony P. LaBoy at the
telephone number or e-mail address indicated under the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this notice.
    The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that
question or complain about this proposed rule or any policy or action
of the Coast Guard.

Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would call 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 proposed 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 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This proposed rule would 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.

Civil Justice Reform

    This proposed 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 proposed rule under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

    This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would 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 proposed 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 proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed 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 made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a
category of actions which do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. A preliminary
environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination will be
made available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. This
proposed rule involves the establishment of a safety zone. We seek any
comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant
environmental impact from this proposed 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 proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 165, as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

    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(g), 6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; Pub. L.
107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.
    2. The Coast Guard proposes to amend Sec.  165.1305 by revising
paragraph (a) to read as follows:

Sec.  165.1305  Commencement Bay, Tacoma, WA.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone for the Tacoma
Freedom Fair Air Show: All portions of Commencement Bay bounded by the
following coordinates: Latitude 47[deg]17'38'' N, Longitude
122[deg]28'43'' W; thence south easterly to Latitude 47[deg]17'4'' N,
Longitude 122[deg]27'32'' W; thence south westerly to Latitude
47[deg]16'35'' N, Longitude 122[deg]28'1'' W; thence north westerly
along the shoreline to Latitude 47[deg]17'10'' N, Longitude
122[deg]29'14'' W; thence returning to the origin. This safety zone
resembles a rectangle protruding from the shoreline along Ruston Way.
Floating markers will be placed by the sponsor of the event to
delineate the boundaries of the safety zone.
* * * * *

    Dated: March 24, 2011.
S. J. Ferguson,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Puget Sound.
[FR Doc. 2011-8370 Filed 4-6-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 81 (Wednesday, April 27, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24861-24862]
[FR Doc No: 2016-09837]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2016-0002; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-1603]

Proposed Flood Hazard Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Comments are requested on proposed flood hazard
determinations, which may include additions or modifications of any
Base Flood Elevation (BFE), base flood depth, Special Flood Hazard Area
(SFHA) boundary or zone designation, or regulatory floodway on the
Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and where applicable, in the
supporting Flood Insurance Study (FIS) reports for the communities
listed in the table below. The purpose of this notice is to seek
general information and comment regarding the preliminary FIRM, and
where applicable, the FIS report that the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) has provided to the affected communities. The FIRM and
FIS report are the basis of the floodplain management measures that the
community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of having in
effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for participation in the
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). In addition, the FIRM and FIS
report, once effective, will be used by insurance agents and others to
calculate appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings
and the contents of those buildings.

DATES: Comments are to be submitted on or before July 26, 2016.

ADDRESSES: The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, the FIS report
for each community are available for inspection at both the online
location and the respective Community Map Repository address listed in
the tables below. Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS
report for each community are accessible online through the FEMA Map
Service Center at www.msc.fema.gov for comparison.
    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FEMA-B-1603, to
Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance
and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC
20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering
Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA,
500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email)
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or visit the FEMA Map Information
eXchange (FMIX) online at www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FEMA proposes to make flood hazard
determinations for each community listed below, in accordance with
section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C.
4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a).
    These proposed flood hazard determinations, together with the
floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum
that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the
community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent
in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any
time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies
established by other Federal, State, or regional entities. These flood
hazard determinations are used to meet the floodplain management
requirements of the NFIP and also are used to calculate the appropriate
flood insurance premium rates for new buildings built after the FIRM
and FIS report become effective.
    The communities affected by the flood hazard determinations are
provided in the tables below. Any request for reconsideration of the
revised flood hazard information shown on the Preliminary FIRM and FIS
report that satisfies the data requirements outlined in 44 CFR 67.6(b)
is considered an appeal. Comments unrelated to the flood hazard
determinations also will be considered before the FIRM and FIS report
become effective.
    Use of a Scientific Resolution Panel (SRP) is available to
communities in support of the appeal resolution process. SRPs are
independent panels of experts in hydrology, hydraulics, and other
pertinent sciences established to

review conflicting scientific and technical data and provide
recommendations for resolution. Use of the SRP only may be exercised
after FEMA and local communities have been engaged in a collaborative
consultation process for at least 60 days without a mutually acceptable
resolution of an appeal. Additional information regarding the SRP
process can be found online at http://floodsrp.org/pdfs/srp_fact_sheet.pdf.
    The watersheds and/or communities affected are listed in the tables
below. The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, FIS report for each
community are available for inspection at both the online location and
the respective Community Map Repository address listed in the tables.
For communities with multiple ongoing Preliminary studies, the studies
can be identified by the unique project number and Preliminary FIRM
date listed in the tables. Additionally, the current effective FIRM and
FIS report for each community are accessible online through the FEMA
Map Service Center at www.msc.fema.gov for comparison.

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

    Dated: April 12, 2016.
Roy E. Wright,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation, Department
of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Community map repository
               Community                             address
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Henderson County, Kentucky, and Incorporated Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata preliminaryfloodhazarddata
------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Project: 15-04-8107S Preliminary Date: November 17, 2015
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Henderson......................  City Hall, 222 First Street,
                                          Henderson, KY 42419.
Unincorporated Areas of Henderson        Henderson County Courthouse, 20
 County.                                  North Main Street, Henderson,
                                          KY 42420.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Jim Wells County, Texas, and Incorporated Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata preliminaryfloodhazarddata
------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Project: 14-06-0766S Preliminary Date: September 30, 2015
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Alice..........................  City Hall, 500 East Main
                                          Street, Alice, TX 78332.
City of Premont........................  City Government Offices, 200
                                          Southwest First Street,
                                          Premont, TX 78375.
City of San Diego......................  City Hall, 404 South Mier
                                          Street, San Diego, TX 78384.
Unincorporated Areas of Jim Wells        County Courthouse, 200 North
 County.                                  Almond Street, Alice, TX
                                          78332.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Nueces County, Texas, and Incorporated Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata preliminaryfloodhazarddata
------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Project: 05-06-A088S Preliminary Date: October 23, 2015
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Agua Dulce.....................  City Hall, 1514 Second Street,
                                          Agua Dulce, TX 78330.
City of Aransas Pass...................  City Hall, 600 West Cleveland
                                          Boulevard, Aransas Pass, TX
                                          78336.
City of Bishop.........................  City Hall, 203 East Main
                                          Street, Bishop, TX 78343.
City of Corpus Christi.................  Development Services, 2406
                                          Leopard Street, Corpus
                                          Christi, TX 78408.
City of Driscoll.......................  City Hall, 130 West Avenue D,
                                          Driscoll, TX 78351.
City of Petronila......................  Petronila City Hall, 2475
                                          County Road 69, Robstown, TX
                                          78380.
City of Port Aransas...................  City Hall, 710 West Avenue A,
                                          Port Aransas, TX 78373.
City of Portland.......................  Public Works, 1101 Moore
                                          Avenue, Portland, TX 78374.
City of Robstown.......................  Code Enforcement, 201 North 4th
                                          Street, Robstown, TX 78380.
Unincorporated Areas of Nueces County..  Nueces County Courthouse, 901
                                          Leopard Street, Corpus
                                          Christi, TX 78401.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2016-09837 Filed 4-26-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-12-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 223 (Thursday, November 19, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 72430-72431]
[FR Doc No: 2015-29506]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

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

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1345-002.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Compliance filing: 2015-11-12_SMEPA Compliance
Amendment to be effective 6/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 11/12/15.
    Accession Number: 20151112-5253.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/3/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2239-001.
    Applicants: NextEra Energy Transmission West, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: NextEra Energy Transmission West,
LLC Response to Deficiency Letter to be effective 10/20/2015.
    Filed Date: 11/10/15.
    Accession Number: 20151110-5163.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/1/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2679-000.
    Applicants: Latigo Wind Park, LLC.
    Description: Latigo Wind Park, LLC submits tariff filing per 35.12:
Latigo Wind Park, LLC MBR Tariff to be effective 11/15/2015 Replaces
20150921-5134).
    Filed Date: 10/22/15.
    Accession Number: 20151022-5049.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/3/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-36-001.
    Applicants: Public Service Company of Colorado.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: 2015-11-12_PSC-WAPA-Con Fac Agrmt-
359-0.0.1-Amend to be effective 12/8/2015.
    Filed Date: 11/12/15.
    Accession Number: 20151112-5199.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/3/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-305-000.

    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2015-11-10 Filing to
Maintain Default Loss Allocation Provisions Effectiveness to be
effective 2/11/2016.
    Filed Date: 11/10/15.
    Accession Number: 20151110-5165.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/1/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-306-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2015-11-11_SA 2865
ITCTransmission-Michigan Wind 3 E&P Agreement (J321) to be effective
11/12/2015.
    Filed Date: 11/12/15.
    Accession Number: 20151112-5008.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/3/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-307-000.
    Applicants: ISO New England Inc.
    Description: ISO New England Inc. submits Installed Capacity
Requirement, Hydro Quebec Interconnection Capability Credits and
Related Values for the 2019/2020 Capacity Commitment Period.
    Filed Date: 11/10/15.
    Accession Number: 20151110-5193.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/1/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-308-000.
    Applicants: ISO New England Inc.
    Description: ISO New England Inc. submits Informational filing for
Qualification in the Forward Capacity Market.
    Filed Date: 11/10/15.
    Accession Number: 20151110-5195.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/25/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-309-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Notice of Cancellation of ISA No.
4076, Queue No. Z1-098 to be effective 1/5/2016.
    Filed Date: 11/12/15.
    Accession Number: 20151112-5143.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/3/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-310-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Amendment to Oregon Clean
Energy ISA No. 3876, Queue No. Y1-069 to be effective 5/9/2014.
    Filed Date: 11/12/15.
    Accession Number: 20151112-5153.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/3/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-311-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: ice Agreement No. 4299;
Queue No. AA2-072 to be effective 10/13/2015.
    Filed Date: 11/12/15.
    Accession Number: 20151112-5204.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/3/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-312-000.
    Applicants: Parrey, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Shared Facilities Agreement,
FERC Electric Rate Schedule No. 1 to be effective 1/12/2016.
    Filed Date: 11/12/15.
    Accession Number: 20151112-5251.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/3/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-313-000.
    Applicants: Java Solar, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Shared Facilities Agreement,
FERC Electric Rate Schedule No. 1 to be effective 1/12/2016.
    Filed Date: 11/12/15.
    Accession Number: 20151112-5252.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/3/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-314-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc., South
Mississippi Electric Power Association.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2015-11-12_SMEPA Protocol
Filing to be effective 6/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 11/12/15.
    Accession Number: 20151112-5255.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/3/15.

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

    Dated: November 12, 2015.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-29506 Filed 11-18-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


DRAFT Page 1 12/ 01/ 2004 U. S. EPA BOARD OF SCIENTIFIC COUNSELORS Mercury Subcommittee DRAFT MEETING AGENDA January 19, 2005 9: 00 am   12: 00 pm EST CONFERENCE CALL Participation by Teleconference Only Wednesday, January 19, 2005 9: 00 am Mechanics of Call/ Roll Call Heather Drumm, DFO, Mercury Subcommittee 9: 15 am Welcome & Introductions Dr. Herb Windom, Chair, Mercury Subcommittee 9: 30 am Multi year Plans: Process and Context Mimi Dannel, Office of Science Policy, ORD  What are Multi Year Plans?  How do MYPs relate to the EPA and ORD Strategic Plans?  How are MYPs used in the planning and budgeting processes?

9: 50 am Overview of the Mercury MYP Bill Stelz, National Center for Environmental Research, ORD 10: 30 am Presentation of the Charge Questions Dr. Herb Windom, Chair 10: 45 am Discussion of the Charge Questions Subcommittee 11: 15 am Brief Overview of Background Documents/ Dr. Herb Windom, Chair Writing Assignments 11: 30 am Administrative Procedures Heather Drumm ( EPA) Logistics for Face to Face Meeting DFO, Mercury Subcommittee 11: 45 am Public Comments 11: 55 am Wrap up Dr. Herb Windom, Chair 12: 00 pm Adjourn


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 177 (Thursday, September 16, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51696-51698]
[FR Doc No: 2021-19973]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-92938; File No. SR-MSRB-2021-05]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Municipal Securities Rulemaking
Board; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule
Change To Provide a Further Extension of Time To Become Appropriately
Qualified by Passing the Municipal Advisor Principal Qualification
Examination (Series 54) Pursuant to MSRB Rule G-3, on Professional
Qualification Requirements

September 10, 2021.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'' or ``Exchange Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice
is hereby given that on September 2, 2021 the Municipal Securities
Rulemaking Board (``MSRB'') 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 the MSRB. 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 MSRB filed with the Commission a proposed rule change to amend
Supplementary Material .09, Temporary Relief for Municipal Advisor
Principal, of MSRB Rule G-3, on professional qualification
requirements, to provide a further extension of time for those
individuals who meet the definition of a municipal advisor principal
\3\ to become appropriately qualified by passing the Municipal Advisor
Principal Qualification Examination (``Series 54 examination''). The
MSRB has designated the proposed rule change as constituting a
``noncontroversial'' rule

change under Section 19(b)(3)(A) \4\ of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
\5\ thereunder, which renders the proposal effective upon receipt of
this filing by the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The term ``municipal advisor principal'' is defined in MSRB
Rule G-3(e)(i) to mean a natural person associated with a municipal
advisor who is qualified as a municipal advisor representative and
is directly engaged in the management, direction or supervision of
the municipal advisory activities of the municipal advisor and its
associated persons.
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \5\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the MSRB's
website at www.msrb.org/Rules-and-Interpretations/SEC-Filings/2021-Filings.aspx, at the MSRB's principal office, 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 MSRB 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 MSRB 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
    In April 2020, and again in December 2020, the MSRB filed proposed
rule changes for immediate effectiveness with the SEC that provided
regulatory relief on a temporary basis to municipal advisors and
dealers in response to the operational challenges and disruptions to
normal business functions as a result of the coronavirus disease
(``COVID-19'') pandemic (``April relief'' and ``December relief'').\6\
In connection with the MSRB's April relief, due to the uncertainty
regarding ongoing stay-at-home orders and social distance restrictions
that impacted capacity at Prometric testing centers,\7\ the MSRB
adopted Supplementary Material .09 of MSRB Rule G-3 to extend the date
by which individuals were required to become qualified with the Series
54 examination from November 12, 2020 to March 31, 2021. In its
December relief, due to the protracted nature of the pandemic, the MSRB
amended Supplementary Material .09 of MSRB Rule G-3 a second time to
extend the time period further from March 31, 2021 to November 12,
2021, for individuals to become qualified with the Series 54
examination.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Exchange Act Release No. 88694 (April 20, 2020), 85 FR
23088 (April 24, 2020) (File No. SR-MSRB-2020-01). See Exchange Act
Release No. 90621 (December 9, 2020), 85 FR 81254 (December 15,
2020) (File No. SR-MSRB-2020-09).
    \7\ FINRA uses Prometric as its single vendor for the delivery
of professional qualification examinations, including MSRB-owned
professional qualification examinations.
    \8\ The April and December relief extended the initial one-year
grace-period, previously set to expire on November 12, 2020, to
allow individuals functioning as municipal advisor principals to
continue to engage in the management, direction or supervision of
the municipal advisory activities of the municipal advisor and its
associated persons, so long as such persons are qualified with the
Municipal Advisor Representative Qualification Examination (``Series
50'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed amendment to Supplementary Material .09 of MSRB Rule
G-3 would further extend the time period from November 12, 2021 to
November 30, 2021, for individuals to become qualified with the Series
54 examination. This time extension is being proposed in connection
with the MSRB's efforts to facilitate the remote proctoring of the
Series 54 examination; and notably, the proposed extension of time
roughly coincides with the number of days taken to launch the Series 54
examination online.\9\ On August 11, 2021, the MSRB announced, given
the quickly approaching compliance date by which individuals have to
take and pass the Series 54 examination and in recognition of pandemic-
related challenges, the MSRB would provide an interim accommodation to
allow individuals to take the Series 54 examination online.
Specifically, the Series 54 examination was made available to take
online beginning on August 23, 2021 and will be available to take
online until November 30, 2021.\10\ The Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority (``FINRA''), as designated by the Commission, provides test
administration services to the MSRB for the delivery of MSRB-owned
professional qualification examinations and is facilitating the
delivery of the Series 54 examination online.\11\ The MSRB believes
that the extension of time is appropriate given the quick nature in
which the Series 54 examination was launched online, on account of
exigent circumstances, and that the extension affords individuals time
to engage in informed decision making regarding how to test. Relatedly,
permitting the remote proctoring of the Series 54 examination, on a
temporary basis, as well as ongoing in-person testing at Prometric
testing centers, will facilitate compliance with MSRB Rule G-3(e)(ii)
during the pandemic.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The launch of the Series 54 examination online took
approximately 12 days from the date the MSRB announced the exam
would be made available online. The MSRB is proposing to extend the
compliance date by 18 days taking into consideration the
Thanksgiving holiday.
    \10\ See MSRB Notice 2021-10 (August 11, 2021), ``MSRB Provides
Interim Accommodation for Municipal Advisor Principal Qualification
Examination (Series 54 Exam),'' available at https://www.msrb.org/-/media/Files/Regulatory-Notices/Announcements/2021-10.ashx??n=1.
    \11\ See, e.g., Exchange Act Release No. 75714 (August 17,
2015), 80 FR 50883 (August 21, 2015) (Designation of the Financial
Industry Regulatory Authority to Administer Professional
Qualification Tests for Associated Persons of Registered Municipal
Advisors). Individuals who wish to take the Series 54 examination
online must first complete ``FINRA Online Exam Administration
Request Form,'' available at https://www.finra.org/registration-exams-ce/qualification-exams/online-exam-administration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The MSRB proposes this interim accommodation in recognition of the
approaching compliance date for municipal advisors to have at least one
person appropriately qualified as a municipal advisor principal; and
therefore, the accommodation is offered only with respect to the Series
54 examination.
2. Statutory Basis
    Section 15B(b)(2)(A) of the Act \12\ authorizes the MSRB to
prescribe:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-4(b)(2)(A).

. . . standards of training, experience, competence, and such other
qualifications as the Board finds necessary or appropriate in the
public interest or for the protection of investors and municipal
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
entities or obligated persons.

The MSRB believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with this
provision as those acting in the capacity of a municipal advisor
principal would still be subject to the regulatory requirements under
MSRB Rule G-3, including the requirement to be qualified with the
Series 50 examination, which is a prerequisite to taking and passing
the Series 54 examination in order to become qualified as a municipal
advisor principal. Accordingly, the proposed amendments do not relieve
municipal advisors from compliance with underlying obligations that
directly serve to protect investors, municipal entities, obligated
persons and the public interest. The extension of time will provide an
opportunity for individuals to review the information provided by the
MSRB on remote proctoring of exams; make an informed decision regarding
how to test; complete the relevant FINRA form, as necessary; and take
the exam in furtherance of MSRB Rule G-3, which was promulgated in
furtherance of the Exchange Act. The extension provides a reasonable
amount of time to facilitate remote proctoring and enhances compliance
by providing greater opportunities for individuals to take the Series
54 examination.

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

    Section 15B(b)(2)(C) of the Act requires that MSRB rules be
designed not to impose any burden on competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.\13\ The MSRB
believes that the proposed rule change will not impose any burden on
competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the Exchange
Act. The goal of the proposed rule change is to provide temporary
relief to grant additional time for municipal advisors to meet certain
obligations under MSRB rules during the exigent circumstances of the
COVID-19 pandemic but would not alter their underlying obligations
under MSRB rules. Not only does the proposed rule change not burden
competition, but as set forth below, it may result in a benefit to
competition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-4(b)(2)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, Section 15B(b)(2)(L)(iv) of the Exchange Act,
requires that MSRB rules not impose a regulatory burden on small
municipal advisors that is not necessary or appropriate in the public
interest and for the protection of investors, municipal entities, and
obligated persons, provided that there is robust protection of
investors against fraud.\14\ The MSRB believes that the proposed rule
change is consistent with Section 15B(b)(2)(L)(iv) of the Exchange Act
\15\ in that, while the proposed rule change to extend the date by
which individuals have to pass the Series 54 examination will affect
all municipal advisors, including small municipal advisors, there is no
new regulatory burden that results. Small municipal advisors typically
have fewer associated persons and, as a result, their resources may be
more limited during the pandemic and the benefits of the proposed rule
change may provide smaller municipal advisors a greater benefit given
their limited resources. In addition, the MSRB believes that extending
the compliance date by approximately 2\1/2\ weeks may serve to benefit
small municipal advisors by providing greater opportunity for
individuals to prepare for, take and pass the Series 54 examination and
for municipal advisors to meet their compliance obligation to have at
least one person properly qualified by passing the Series 54
examination by the compliance date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-4(b)(2)(L)(iv).
    \15\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 on the
proposed rule change.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \16\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) \17\ thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of
the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily
suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such
action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the
protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of
the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \17\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-MSRB-2021-05 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-MSRB-2021-05. 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 website (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 website 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 the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the MSRB. All comments received
will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-MSRB-2021-05 and should be submitted on
or before October 7, 2021.

    For the Commission, pursuant to delegated authority.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-19973 Filed 9-15-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


Comment Info: =================

General Comment:A 75 day time period to review the proposed regulations is insufficient. We are requesting that the review period be extended to at least 180 days.


November 18, 2005 FIFRA SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY PANEL ( SAP) OPEN MEETING DECEMBER 6 8, 2005 FIFRA SAP WEB SITE http:// www. epa. gov/ scipoly/ sap/ OPP Docket Telephone: ( 703) 305 5805 Docket Number: OPP 2005 0249 PLANT INCORPORATED PROTECTANTS BASED ON VIRUS COAT PROTEIN GENES: SCIENCE ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED RULE Judith Bender, Ph. D.

Dr. Judith Bender is an Associate Professor in the Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Her research interests focus on DNA methylation and gene silencing in Arabidopsis and the regulation of tryptophan metabolism in Arabidopsis. Dr. Bender has a B. S. in Biochemistry from Harvard Radcliffe College, a Ph. D. in Biochemistry from Harvard University and completed a Postdoctoral Fellowship in Biology from Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research.

Judith Brown, Ph. D.

Dr. Brown is a Professor in the Department of Plant Sciences at the University of Arizona. Dr. Brown's research interests are ( 1) begomovirus/ satellite DNA diversity and diversification mechanisms, pathogenesis ( 2) biotype formation Bemisia tabaci ( Genn.) complex, role of endosymbionts in B. tabaci speciation ( 3) whitefly genome ( ESTs)/ proteomics to elucidate transmission pathway ( 4) begomovirus resistance/ transgenic plants gene silencing. Dr. Brown has a Ph. D. in Plant Pathology from the University of Arizona, a MS in Plant Pathology from Washington State University and BS in Horticultural Science from Texas A& M University.

George Cobb, Ph. D.

Dr. Cobb is an Associate Professor of Environmental Toxicology, The Institute of Environmental and Human Health, Texas Tech University & Texas Tech Health Sciences Center. His research entails improving approaches for quantifying exposure and trophic transport of toxicants. He provides coordinated research and education opportunities for students in toxicology, environmental chemistry, environmental chemistry, sensor development, trace analysis, and risk assessment. Dr. Cobb has a Ph. D. in Chemistry from the University of South Florida and a B. S. in Chemistry from the College of Charleston. Shou Wei Ding, Ph. D.

Dr. Ding is a Professor in the Department of Plant Pathology and the Institute for Integrative Genome Biology in the College of Natural and Agricultural Sciences, University of California, Riverside. He received his PhD from the Australian National University's Research School of Biological Sciences in 1990, and subsequently completed postdoctoral training in plant molecular virology at the Waite Institute, University of Adelaide, South Australia. He has previously served on the faculty of the Institute of Molecular Agrobiology at the National University of Singapore. Dr. Ding has active research programs funded by the NIH, USDA, and California Citrus Research Board to investigate mechanisms of virus host interactions, primarily focusing on the biology and application of gene silencing as an antiviral immunity in both plant and animal systems. His teaching responsibilities at the University of California, Riverside include undergraduate and graduate courses in virology. Dr. Ding is an editor of FEBS Letters ( Federation of European Biochemistry Societies). He also serves on the editorial boards of Virology and Phytopathology.

Bryce W. Falk, Ph. D.

Dr. Bryce Falk is Professor, Dept. of Plant Pathology, University of California, Davis, CA. Dr. Falk received his BS degree in Biology from Cal Poly in San Luis Obispo, California, followed by MS and PhD degrees in Plant Pathology from the University of California, Berkeley. After postdoctoral work at UC Riverside he was an Assistant Professor at the University of Florida, Everglades Research and Education Center in Belle Glade. In 1985 he moved to UC Davis advancing to Full Professor in 1991. He has served on a number of Federal Grant review panels and was the first panel manager for the NRICGP Biology of Plant Microbe Associations program in 2000. He has served on editorial boards for a number of scientific journals, currently for Virology and Molecular Plant Pathology. His lab research has been focused on various aspects of the biology and molecular biology of plant viruses. His current efforts are mainly with viruses in the family Closteroviridae, genera Crinivirus and Closterovirus. He is examining the replication and host plant interactions/ determinants for Lettuce infectious yellows virus ( LIYV). His lab is using immunological, microscopic and molecular biological tools to assess protein accumulation in cells/ whole plants and taking a mutagenic approach to modify specific LIYV encoded proteins and then analyze effects on function. They are also attempting to understand LIYV encoded determinants that effect LIYV transmission by the whitefly, Bemisia tabaci. His lab is also taking novel approaches to confer resistance to Citrus tristeza virus in citrus by engineering plants to respond with a systemic resistance signal, and they are trying to better understand the molecular and biological factors affecting CTV host: plant interactions and virus evolution. He has recently also evaluated how transgenic, virus resistant plants may affect virus populations and evolution by performing field, laboratory and greenhouse studies to assess the genetic composition of plant virus populations and how selection conferred by transgenic resistance may direct shifts in virus genotype populations. In 2003 and 2004 he was named Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science ( AAAS) and the American Phytopathological Society ( APS), respectively.

Steven Gendel, Ph. D.

Dr. Gendel received his B. S. in Chemical Engineering from Case Western Reserve University and his Ph. D. in Cell Biology from the University of California, Irvine. He held postdoctoral positions at Harvard University and the University of Toronto before joining the Department of Genetics at Iowa State University. Since 1990 he has been with the FDA at the National Center for Food Safety and Technology in Chicago as Chief of the Biotechnology Studies Branch and now as Biotechnology Program Lead. His research interests focus on the application of bioinformatics to food safety, particularly as related to food biotechnology and food allergens.

Jonathan Gressel, Ph. D.

Dr. Jonathan Gressel is Professor Emeritus in the Department of Plant Sciences, Weizmann Institute of Science, Israel. His areas of expertise are plant and fungal physiology, biochemistry, molecular biology, evolutionary dynamics in agro ecosystems. His research interests focus on transgenic herbicide resistant crops, introgression and molecular prevention of crop transgenes to weeds, herbicide resistance, herbicide action, parasitic weeds and biotechnological axenic systems. Dr. Gressel has a BS in Plant Science from Ohio State University, a MS in Botany from the University of Wisconsin and Ph. D. in Botany/ horticulture from the University of Wisconsin.

Simon P. Hogan, Ph. D.

Dr. Simon Hogan is Assistant Professor of Pediatrics, Division of Allergy and Immunology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center , Cincinnati , OH . He received his Ph. D. from the John Curtin School of Medical Research, Australian National University , Canberra, Australia in 1998 and subsequently completed a National Health Medical Research Council NHMRC CJ Martin Fellowship in Allergy and Immunology at Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center , Cincinnati , OH . He was appointed in 2004 to Head of the Gastrointestinal Research laboratory, John Curtin School of Medical Research, ANU, Canberra , Australia as part of the NHMRC funded Program grant to examine Molecular mechanisms in the regulation of allergy and inflammation. Dr Hogan has an active research program investigating inflammation induced gastrointestinal dysfunction. Current projects are ( 1) to elucidate the cellular and molecular processes involved in gastrointestinal allergic responses using novel models of allergic responses in mice with translational studies in humans, ( 2) to identify the role of gastrointestinal inflammation in peristaltic reflex and gastrointestinal epithelial cell dysfunction and ( 3) to characterize food allergen reactive T cells in eosinophilic esophagitis.

Roger Hull, DSc. Dr. Roger Hull is an Emeritus Fellow at the John Innes Centre in Norwich, United Kingdom. He has a BS in Botany at Cambridge University, a PhD in Plant Pathology at the University of London in 1964 and a DSc in Plant Virology by the University of London in 1980. Other awards include Honorary Professorships at the University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK and at Peking University, China, an Honorary Doctorate at the University of Perpignan, France and Fellowship of the American Phytopathological Society. His research interests are in the area of badnaviruses and tenuiviruses, RNA viruses and designing resistance in plants to virus infection or controlling the spread of viruses from plant to plant. He is also involved in biosafety issues relating to the uptake of transgenic crops in developing countries.

Alexander Karasev, Ph. D.

Dr. Alexander Karasev is an Assistant Professor, Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. His research focused on the design and construction of novel viral based vectors for expression of foreign gene sequences in plants and development of plant based oral vaccines for viral and bacterial infectious diseases. Dr. Karasev has a Ph. D. in Molecular Biology from Moscow State University, Russia.

Steven A. Lommel, Ph. D.

Dr. Steve Lommel is the Assistant Vice Chancellor for Research at North Carolina State University and is a Professor with joint appointments in the Departments of Plant Pathology and Genetics in the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences. He received his Ph. D. from the University of California, Berkeley in 1983. He has previously served on the faculty at Kansas State University and was Assistant Director of the North Carolina Agriculture Research Service. Dr. Lommel has an active research program funded by the NSF to explore the genetic and molecular mechanisms of plant virus pathogenicity. His laboratory is interested in the structure of robust small plant viruses with the goal of using them as viral based nanotechnology cargo vehicles. Dr. Lommel is the co Director of the Nicotiana Genome Initiative based at North Carolina State University. His teaching responsibilities at North Carolina State University include graduate courses in Plant Pathology and Plant Virology as well as invited lectures in Biotechnology and Genetics. Dr. Lommel is the editor for the Journal Virus Research and sits on the editorial boards of several other plant biology and virology journals. He was also one of the original organizers and current University representative for PIPRA, the Public Intellectual Property Resource for Agriculture.

Diana Pilson, Ph. D. Dr. Diana Pilson is an Associate Professor of Biological Sciences at the University of Nebraska, where she has been on the faculty since 1994. She received her Ph. D. from Duke University ( Department of Zoology and the University Program in Genetics) in 1990, and then was a member of the research faculty at the University of Montana. Dr. Pilson has an active research program examining the ecological consequences of the escape of transgenes into wild populations ( funded by the USDA), including projects evaluating the effects of insect herbivores on the population dynamics of wild sunflower and the effects of virus infection on wild squash populations. Other work ( funded by USDA and NSF) has examined the evolution of plant response to herbivore attack and the evolution of plant mating systems. Her teaching responsibilities include undergraduate and graduate courses in evolution and ecology. She has served on proposal review panels for the National Science Foundation and the US Department of Agriculture Competitive Grants Program, and is currently a member of the Editorial Board for Ecology/ Ecological Monographs.

Alison Power, Ph. D.

Dr. Alison G. Power is a Professor in the Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology and Dean of the Graduate School at Cornell University in Ithaca, New York, USA. She received a B. S. in Biology from the University of Alaska Fairbanks and a Ph. D. in Zoology from the University of Washington in 1985. Her research focuses on the ecology of viruses in plant communities, including both natural and agricultural communities. Current research also addresses the impact of agriculture on the spread of plant diseases in natural ecosystems and the ecological risks of genetically engineered crops expressing transgenic virus resistance. Other research interests include biodiversity conservation in managed ecosystems, interactions between agricultural and natural ecosystems, agroecology, and tropical ecology. Currently, Power serves as Vice President for Public Affairs for the Ecological Society of America, on the Executive Committee of the Association of Graduate Schools, and on the Oversight Committee of the Collaborative Crop Research Program of the McKnight Foundation. She has served on the Scientific Advisory Board of the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis ( NCEAS); several committees of the National Research Council; and the Executive Committee of the Organization for Tropical Studies.

Lars Poulsen, Ph. D.

Dr. Lars Poulsen is head of research at the Allergy Clinic at the National University Hospital in Copenhagen, Denmark. In addition, he serves as an adjunct Professor of Immunology at the Danish Technical University and as external associate professor in Basic Allergology at the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Copenhagen. Dr. Poulsen serves as a manager of a national allergy research programme at the Danish Allergy Research Center. Dr. Poulsen has a Ph. D. from the Univeristy of Copenhagen Medical Faculty, Danish Doctorate of Medical Sciences at the University of Copenhagen and postdoctoral training at the Department of Immunology at Johns Hopkins University. Geoffrey I. Scott, Ph. D.

Dr. Geoff Scott is the Director of the Center for Coastal Environmental Health and Biomolecular Research at Charleston, SC, National Centers of Coastal Ocean Science, National Ocean Service, NOAA. Dr. Scott holds adjunct faculty appointments at the Medical University of South Carolina, University of South Carolina, University of Charleston, and Texas Technical University. He received his Ph. D. in marine science from the University of South Carolina in 1979. Research experience includes working as an aquatic toxicologist for the EPA and the Research Planning Institute, as well as, an Associate Professor in the School of Public Health at the University of South Carolina where his research was focused on understanding the impacts of agricultural pesticide NPS runoff and mosquito control agents on estuarine ecosystems, and the health of estuarine organisms as well as methods for measuring bacterial pollution emanating from different septic tanks systems in the coastal zone of SC. Additional research has focused on the impacts of oil and hazardous material spills on coastal ecosystems throughout the U. S. including studies in Alaska, Puget Sound, Texas, Puerto Rico and the Florida Keys. His research at NOAA has focused on agricultural and urban nonpoint source runoff issues throughout the southeastern US. His teaching responsibilities at the University of South Carolina include courses in environmental health sciences and aquatic toxicology. Dr. Scott has served on numerous advisory panels to government and industry including: ( 1) the Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Conference; ( 2) EPA's Advisory Board, Panel on Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals; ( 3) EPA's Food Quality Protection Act Board, Scientific Panel Member; ( 4) EPA's Environmental Technology Verification Program, Water Stakeholder Committee Member; ( 5) Governor's Primary Health Care Task Force; ( 6) the SC Coastal Pesticide Advisory Committee; ( 7) SC Sea Grant Advisory Board; ( 8) Editorial Board Aquatic Toxicology; and ( 9) United Nations Gulf of Guinea Large Marine Ecosystem Study Technical Advisor.