											7/25/2013

The Honorable Randy C. Huffman Cabinet Secretary West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection 601 57[th] Street SE  Charleston, West Virginia 25304

Dear Secretary Huffman:

      On July 1, 2013, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) received a revision to the West Virginia State Implementation Plan (SIP).  The SIP revision was submitted to address required infrastructure elements of Section 110(a)(2) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) which are necessary to implement, maintain, and enforce the 2010 1-hour sulfur dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) in West Virginia.  EPA has determined that the submittal is complete for these elements, and is reviewing it to prepare a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPR) action.

      If members of your staff have any questions, they may direct them to Ms. Ellen Schmitt, Office of Air Program Planning, at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

	Sincerely,

							/s/

                                         Diana Esher, Director                                                                        Air Protection Division

cc:  John A. Benedict, Director, West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 163 (Wednesday, August 22, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50755-50756]
[FR Doc No: 2012-20574]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-67671; File No. SR-C2-2012-026]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change
Relating to Its Automatic Order Handling Process

August 15, 2012.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on August 2, 2012, C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated (the
``Exchange'' or ``C2'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described
in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the
Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments
on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend its rules regarding its automatic
order handling process. The text of the proposed rule change is
available on the Exchange's Web site at http://www.c2exchange.com/Legal/, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the
Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange 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
    The Exchange proposes to amend its rules regarding its automatic
order handling process. The proposed rule change adds paragraph (h) to
Rule 6.12 to codify how the System \3\ handles market orders to sell in
option series for which the national best bid in the series is zero
(``no-bid series'').\4\ If the System receives during the trading day
or has resting in the electronic book (the ``Book'') after the opening
of trading a market order to sell in a no-bid series, it handles the
order as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The System is the automated trading system used by the
Exchange for the trading of options contracts.
    \4\ The Exchange notes that, for singly listed series, the
national best bid is equivalent to the Exchange's best bid and the
national best offer is equivalent to the Exchange's best offer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     If the Exchange best offer in that series is less than or
equal to $0.30, then the System will consider, for the remainder of the
trading day, the market order as a limit order to sell with a limit
price equal to the minimum trading increment applicable to the series
and enter the order into the Book behind limit orders to sell at the
minimum increment that are already resting in the Book.
     If the Exchange best offer in that series is greater than
$0.30, then the market order will be cancelled.
    The Exchange's Rules are currently silent on how the System handles
market orders to sell in no-bid series. The Exchange believes that
proposed Rule 6.12(h) will clarify for investors how the System handles
these orders.\5\ The Exchange believes that the automatic handling of
market orders to sell in no-bid series if the Exchange best offer is
less than or equal to $0.30 facilitates the System's automatic handling
process. Additionally, the $0.30 threshold serves as a protection
feature for investors in certain situations, such as when a series is
no-bid because the last bid traded just prior to the entry of the
market order to sell. The purpose of this threshold is to limit the
automatic handling of market orders to sell in no-bid series to only
those for true zero-bid options, as options in no-bid series with an
offer of more than $0.30 are likely not worthless.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Exchange notes for informational purposes that other
options exchanges have rules that address how their systems handle
market orders to sell no-bid series. See, e.g., NASDAQ OMX PHLX
(``Phlx'') Rule 1080(i) (which provides that the Phlx system will
convert market orders to sell a no-bid series to limit orders to
sell with a limit price of the minimum trading increment applicable
to that series that are received when Phlx's disseminated quotation
in the series has a bid/ask differential less than or equal to
$0.25, and will place the limit orders on the book).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For example, if the System receives a market order to sell in a no-
bid series with a minimum increment of $0.01 and the Exchange best
offer is $0.20, the System will consider, for the remainder of the
trading day, the order as a limit order with a price of $0.01 and
submit it to the Book behind other limit orders to sell at the minimum
increment that are already resting in the Book. At that point, even if
the series is no-bid because, for example, the last bid just traded and
the limit order trades at $0.01, the next bid entered after the trade
would not be higher than $0.20.\6\ However, if the System receives a
market order to sell in a no-bid series with a minimum increment of
$0.01 and the Exchange best offer is $1.20 (because, for example, the
last bid of $1.00 just traded), the System will instead cancel the
order. It would be unfair to the entering firm to let its market order
trade as a limit order for $0.01 because, for example, the firm
submitted the order during the brief time when there were no
disseminated bids in a series trading significantly higher than the
minimum increment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ If the order does not execute during the trading day as a
limit order and remains outstanding after the close of trading
(i.e., a GTC order), the System at that time will no longer consider
the order as a limit order and will again handle the order as a
market order to sell after the close of trading. The market order
will stay on the Book until the opening of the next trading day (or
until cancelled), at which point it may execute during the open or,
if it remains unexecuted after the opening of trading, it will
either execute with the best bid at the time or, if the series is
still no-bid, again be handled pursuant to proposed Rule 6.12(h).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The $0.30 threshold has been in place for a number of years, and
the Exchange believes the threshold is reasonable. The Exchange notes
that this threshold is less than the acceptable price range (``APR'')
in the price check parameter provision in Rule 6.17. Pursuant to that
Rule, the System will not automatically execute a marketable order if
the width between the national best bid and national best offer is not
within the APR, which for an option contract with a bid of less than $2
may not be less than $0.375.\7\ Instead, the System will cancel the
order. Notwithstanding this provision, proposed Rule 6.12(h) allows for
the potential execution of market orders to sell in no-bid series with
offers

less than [sic] \8\ $0.30 as limit orders at the price of a minimum
increment. If the threshold in proposed Rule 6.12(h) were higher, the
risk of having a market order trade at a minimum increment in a series
that is not truly no-bid would increase. This risk of execution is not
present in the price check parameter provision of Rule 6.17, and
therefore the Exchange believes a wider APR is appropriate for that
provision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Rule 6.17 also provides that the System will not
automatically execute eligible orders that are marketable if the
execution would follow an initial partial execution on the Exchange
and would be at a subsequent price that is not within an acceptable
tick distance from the initial execution. The APR for purposes of
Rule 6.17 is determined by the Exchange on a class-by-class basis
and may not be less than $0.375 between the bid and offer for each
option contract for which the bid is less than $2, $0.60 where the
bid is at least $2 but does not exceed $5, $0.75 where the bid is
more than $5 but does not exceed $10, $1.20 where the bid is more
than $10 but does not exceed $20, and $1.50 where the bid is more
than $20. An ``acceptable tick distance'' [sic] less than two
minimum increments.
    \8\ The Commission notes that C2's proposed rule text actually
specifies that the Exchange would convert market orders in no-bid
series to limit orders where the Exchange's best offer is less than
or equal to $.30 (emphasis added).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to the
Exchange and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the
Act.\9\ Specifically, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is
consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) \10\ requirements that the rules of
an exchange be designed to promote just and equitable principles of
trade, to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts, to remove
impediments to and to perfect the mechanism for a free and open market
and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and
the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    In particular, the proposed rule change protects investors and the
public interest by providing investors with more clarity regarding the
System's automatic order handling process--specifically how it
processes market orders to sell in no-bid series. The Exchange believes
that the automated handling of market orders to sell in no-bid series
if the Exchange best offer is $0.30 or less assists with the
maintenance of fair and orderly markets and protects investors and the
public interest because it provides for automated handling of these
orders, ultimately resulting in more efficient executions of these
orders. The Exchange believes that the $0.30 threshold also protects
investors and assists with the maintenance of fair and orderly markets
by preventing executions of market orders to sell in no-bid series with
higher offers at potentially extreme prices in series that are not
truly no-bid. The Exchange believes this threshold appropriately
reflects the interests of investors, as options in no-bid series with
offers higher than $0.30 are likely not worthless. The Exchange
believes an investor would not want automatic handling of these orders
in this situation, as such handling could result in a sale at a
significantly lower price than the investor could otherwise obtain if
the System cancelled the order, and the investor later resubmitted the
order when the series was no longer no-bid.

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

    C2 does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any
burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

    The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

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

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \11\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\12\
Because the 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 prior to
30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). In addition, Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) requires a self-regulatory organization to provide the
Commission with written notice of its intent to file the proposed
rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed
rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing
of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by
the Commission. The Exchange has fulfilled this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-C2-2012-026 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-C2-2012-026. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-C2-2012-026 and should be
submitted on or before September 12, 2012.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-20574 Filed 8-21-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 168 (Friday, August 29, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 51490]
[FR Doc No: 2014-20668]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2014-0672]

Safety Zone; USS MIDWAY Fireworks, San Diego, CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of enforcement of regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce a safety zone for a USS MIDWAY
private fireworks display on October 6, 2014. This marine event occurs
on the navigable waters of San Diego Bay, immediately to the west of
the USS MIDWAY located in San Diego Bay, California. This action is
necessary to provide for the safety of the participants, crew,
spectators, safety vessels, and general users of the waterway. During
the enforcement period, persons and vessels are prohibited from
entering into, transiting through, or anchoring within this regulated
area unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, or his designated
representative.

DATES: The regulations for the marine event listed as Item 6 in Table 1
to 33 CFR 165.1123 will be enforced on October 6, 2014 from 9:45 p.m.
to 10:15 p.m.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
document, call or email Petty Officer Giacomo Terrizzi, Waterways
Management, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Diego, CA; telephone (619) 278-
7233, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard will enforce the safety zone
in San Diego Bay for the private fireworks display. This display occurs
on October 6, 2014 from 9:45 p.m. to 10:15 p.m., off of the moored
attraction vessel, USS MIDWAY. Fireworks displays occur frequently off
of the USS MIDWAY, and the corresponding safety zone to the fireworks
display is published in 33 CFR 165.1123, Table 1, Item 6.
    Under the provisions of 33 CFR 165.1123, persons and vessels are
prohibited from entering into, transiting through, or anchoring within
the 600 foot regulated area safety zone that includes the tug and barge
unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, or his designated
representative. Persons or vessels desiring to enter into or pass
through the safety zone may request permission from the Captain of the
Port or a designated representative. If permission is granted, all
persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of the Captain
of the Port or designated representative. Spectator vessels may safely
transit outside the regulated area, but may not anchor, block, loiter,
or impede the transit of participants or official patrol vessels or
commercial traffic within the federal channel. The Coast Guard may be
assisted by other Federal, State, or local law enforcement agencies in
patrol and notification of this regulation.
    This document is issued under authority of 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 33
CFR 165.1123. In addition to providing notice in the Federal Register,
the Coast Guard will provide the maritime community with advance
notification of this enforcement period via the Local Notice to
Mariners, Broadcast Notice to Mariners, and local advertising by the
event sponsor.
    If the Captain of the Port Sector San Diego or his designated
representative determines that the regulated area need not be enforced
for the full duration stated in this document, he or she may use a
Broadcast Notice to Mariners or other communications coordinated with
the event sponsor to grant general permission to enter the regulated
area.

    Dated: August 1, 2014.
J. S. Spaner,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port San Diego.
[FR Doc. 2014-20668 Filed 8-28-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


Pinoxaden (147500)

Screening Level Usage Analysis (SLUA)

Date: November 17, 2014

What is a Screening Level Usage Analysis (SLUA)?

Available estimates of pesticide usage data for a particular active
ingredient that is used on agricultural crops in the United States.

Pesticide usage data obtained from various sources.  The data are then
merged, averaged, and rounded so that the presented information is not
proprietary, business confidential, or trade secret.

What does it contain?

Pesticide usage data for a single active ingredient only.

Agricultural use sites (crops) that the pesticide is reported to be used
on.

Available pesticide usage information from U.S. states that produce 80%
or more of a crop, in most cases, or less than 80%, in rare cases,
depending on the scope of the survey and available resources.

Annual percent of crop treated (average & maximum) for each agricultural
crop.

Average annual pounds of the pesticide applied for each agricultural
crop (i.e., for the states surveyed, not for the entire United States).

What assumptions can I make about the reported data?

Average pounds of active ingredient applied - Values are calculated by
merging pesticide usage data sources together; averaging across all
observations, then rounding.  Note:  If the estimated value is less than
500, then that value is labeled <500.  Estimated values between 500 &
<1,000,000 are rounded to 1 significant digit.  Estimated values of
1,000,000 or greater are rounded to 2 significant digits.)

Average percent of crop treated - Values are calculated by merging data
sources together; averaging by year, averaging across all years, &
rounding to the nearest multiple of 5.  Note:  If the estimated value is
less than 2.5, then the value is labeled <2.5.  If the estimated value
is less than 1, then the value is labeled <1.

Maximum percent of crop treated - Value is the single maximum value
reported across all data sources, across all years, & rounded up to the
nearest multiple of 5.  Note:  If the estimated value is less than 2.5,
then the value is labeled <2.5.

What are the data sources used?

USDA-NASS (United States Department of Agriculture’s National
Agricultural Statistics Service) – pesticide usage data from 2004 to
2012.

Private pesticide market research – pesticide usage data from 2004 to
2012.

California Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) Pesticide Use
Reporting (PUR) data for 2004 to 2011.

What are the limitations to the data?

Additional registered uses may exist but are not included because the
available surveys do not report usage (e.g., small acreage crops).

Lack of reported usage data for the pesticide on a crop does not imply
zero usage.

Usage data on a particular site may be noted in data sources, but not
quantified.  In these instances, the site would not be reported in the
SLUA.

Non-agricultural use sites (e.g., turf, post-harvest, mosquito control,
etc.) are not reported in the SLUA.  A separate request must be made to
receive these estimates.

Some sites show some use, even though they are not on the label.  This
usage could be due to various factors, including, but not limited to
Section 18 requests, existing stocks of the chemical, data collection
errors, and experimental use permits (EUPs).

Date: November 17, 2014

Screening Level Estimates of Agricultural Uses of Pinoxaden (147500)

Sorted Alphabetically

Reporting Years: 2004-2012

Average	Percent Crop Treated

	Crop	Lbs. A.I.	Average	Maximum

1	Barley	40,000	30	45

2	Wheat	100,000	5	15

All numbers are rounded.

SLUA data sources include:

USDA-NASS (United States Department of Agriculture's National
Agricultural Statistics Service)

Private Pesticide Market Research

These results reflect amalgamated data developed by the Agency and are
releasable to the public.