[Federal Register: March 22, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 55)]
[Notices]
[Page 13544-13545]
[DOCID:fr22mr07-106]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-55480; File No. SR-BSE-2006-46]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Boston Stock Exchange, Inc.; Order
Granting Approval of a Proposed Rule Change Amending Rules To Require
Securities Become Eligible for a Direct Registration System

March 15, 2007.

I. Introduction

    On October 26, 2006, the Boston Stock Exchange, Inc. (``BSE'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'')
proposed rule change SR-BSE-2006-46 pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'').\1\ Notice of the proposal
was published in the Federal Register on December 7, 2006.\2\ No
comment letters were received. For the reasons discussed below, the
Commission is granting approval of the proposed rule change.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54832 (November 29,
2006), 71 FR 71000 (December 7, 2006) [File No. SR-BSE-2006-46].
    \3\ Concurrent with this order, the Commission is approving
similar rule changes submitted by the Philadelphia Stock Exchange,
Inc., and Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc. Securities Exchange Act
Release Nos. 54834 (November 29, 2006), 71 FR 71013 (December 7,
2006) [File No. SR-Phlx-2006-69] and 54833 (November 29, 2006), 71
FR 71004 (December 7, 2006)[File No. SR-CHX-2006-33]. The Commission
has also granted approval to similar rule changes submitted by the
New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE''), American Stock Exchange LLC
(``Amex''), The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq''), and the NYSE
Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca''). Securities Exchange Act Release Nos.
54289 (August 8, 2006), 71 FR 47278 (August 16, 2006) [File No. SR-
NYSE-2006-29]; 54290 (August 8, 2006), 71 FR 47262 (August 16, 2006)
[File No. SR-Amex-2006-40]; 54288 (August 8, 2006), 71 FR 47276
(August 16, 2006) [File No. SR-NASDAQ-2006-08]; 54410 (September 7,
2006), 71 FR 54316 (September 14, 2006) [File No. SR-NYSE Arca-2006-
31].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description

    The Direct Registration System (``DRS'') allows an investor to
establish either through the issuer's transfer agent or through the
investor's broker-dealer a book-entry position on the books of the
issuer and to electronically transfer her position between the transfer
agent and the broker-dealer of her choice through a facility currently
administered by The Depository Trust Company (``DTC'').\4\ DRS,
therefore, enables an investor to have securities registered in her
name on the books of the issuer without having a securities certificate
issued to her and to electronically transfer her securities to her
broker-dealer in order to effect a transaction without the risk,
expenses, and delays associated with the use of securities
certificates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Currently, the only registered clearing agency operating a
DRS is DTC. For a detailed description of DRS and the DRS facilities
administered by DTC, see Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 37931
(November 7, 1996), 61 FR 58600 (November 15, 1996), [File No. SR-
DTC-96-15] (order granting approval to establish DRS) and 41862
(September 10, 1999), 64 FR 51162 (September 21, 1999), [File No.
SR-DTC-99-16] (order approving implementation of the Profile
Modification System).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Investors holding their securities in DRS retain the rights
associated with securities certificates, including such rights as
control of ownership and voting rights, without having the
responsibility of holding and safeguarding securities certificates. In
addition, in corporate actions such as reverse stock splits and
mergers, cancellation of old shares and issuance of new shares are
handled electronically with no securities certificates to be returned
to or received from the transfer agent.
    BSE believes that DRS will be an important step in reducing the use
of securities certificates, which should facilitate transfers in
securities and could eventually lead to lower risks and costs for
issuers and investors.\5\ To encourage the use of DRS, the BSE will
require that all listed securities be eligible to participate in DRS.
As approved, BSE would add Section 3 to Chapter XXVII that will require
any security initially listing on BSE on or after January 1, 2007, to
be eligible for a DRS that is operated by a clearing agency registered
under Section 17A of the Act. This requirement, however, would not
extend to (i) securities of companies which already have securities
listed on BSE, (ii) securities of companies which immediately prior to
such listing had securities listed on another securities exchange in
the U.S., or (iii) non-equity securities which are book-entry only.
Under the rule, on and after January 1, 2008, all securities listed on
BSE, other than non-equity securities which are book-entry only, must
be eligible for a DRS that is operated by a clearing agency registered
under Section 17A of the Act.\6\ While this rule change would require
that securities be DRS eligible, it would not mandate the elimination
of securities certificates and, subject to applicable state law and the
company's governing documents, an investor could still elect to receive
a securities certificate if an issuer elects to issue securities
certificates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ In that regard, in March 2004 the Commission published a
concept release that discussed, among other things, whether more
should be done to reduce the use of physical securities certificates
by individual investors. The Commission noted that the use of
physical certificates increases the costs and risks of clearing and
settling securities transactions, costs that most often are
ultimately borne by investors. Securities Exchange Act Release No.
8398 (March 11, 2004), 69 FR 12922 (March 18, 2004). Issuers may
save money by not having to print or process physical certificates
but may incur other ongoing expenses to maintain book-entry records,
such as mailing statements to shareholders.
    \6\ The exact text of the BSE's proposed rule change is set
forth in its filing, which can be found at http://www.bostonstock.com/legal/pending_rule_filings.html
.

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

    In order for a security to be eligible for the only DRS in
operation today, the issuer is required to use a transfer agent that
meets certain insurance and connectivity requirements.\7\ As a result,
some transfer agents may have to make changes to comply with their
requirements. In addition, certain issuers may have to make amendments
to their governing documents, such as their by-laws or corporate
charters, to be eligible to issue book-entry positions. To allow
sufficient time for these changes, BSE proposed implementing the
proposed requirement on January 1, 2008, for issuers with securities
already listed on BSE or another listed marketplace when the rule is
approved. Companies listing for the first time would have greater
flexibility to adopt any required changes and therefore the proposed
requirement would be applicable to new listings beginning January 1,
2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ DTC's rules require that a transfer agent (including an
issuer acting as its own transfer agent) acting for a company
issuing securities in DRS must be a DRS Limited Participant.
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 37931 (November 7, 1996), 61 FR
58600 (November 15, 1996), [File No. SR-DTC-96-15].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion

    Section 6(b)(5) of the Act requires, among other things, that the
rules of an exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative
acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade,
to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in
regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to,
and facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system, and in general to protect investors and the public interest.\8\
For the reasons described below, the Commission finds that BSE's rule
change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The use of securities certificates has long been identified as an
inefficient and risk-laden mechanism by which to hold and transfer
ownership.\9\ Because

securities certificates require manual processing, their use can result
in significant delays and expenses in processing securities
transactions and presents the risk of certificates being lost or
stolen. Many of these costs and risks are ultimately borne by
investors.\10\ Congress has recognized the problems and dangers that
the use of certificates presents to the safe and efficient operation of
the U.S. clearance and settlement system and has given the Commission
the responsibility and the authority to address these issues.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 49405 (March 11, 2004),
69 FR 12922 (March 18, 2004), [File No. S7-13-04] (Securities
Transaction Settlement Concept Release).
    \10\ Id.
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(a)(2)(A). Congress expressly envisioned the
Commission's authority to extend to all aspects of the securities
handling process of securities transactions within the United
States, including activities by clearing agencies, depositories,
corporate issuers, and transfer agents. See S. Rep. No. 75, 94th
Cong., 1st Sess. at 55 (1975).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Consistent with its Congressional directives and in its efforts to
improve efficiencies and decrease risks associated with processing
securities transactions, the Commission has long advocated a reduction
in the use of certificates in the trading environment by immobilization
or dematerialization of securities and has encouraged the use of
alternatives to holding securities in certificated form. Among other
things, the Commission has approved the rule filings of self-regulatory
organizations that require their members to use the facilities of a
securities depository for the book-entry settlement of all transactions
in depository-eligible securities \12\ and that require any security
listed for trading must be depository eligible if possible.\13\ More
recently the Commission has approved the implementation and expansion
of DRS.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 32455 (June 11, 1993),
58 FR 33679 (June 18, 1993) (order approving rules requiring
members, member organizations, and affiliated members of the New
York Stock Exchange, National Association of Securities Dealers,
American Stock Exchange, Midwest Stock Exchange, Boston Stock
Exchange, Pacific Stock Exchange, and Philadelphia Stock Exchange to
use the facilities of a securities depository for the book-entry
settlement of all transactions in depository-eligible securities
with another financial intermediary).
    \13\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 35798 (June 1, 1995),
60 FR 30909 (June 12, 1995), [File Nos. SR-Amex-95-17; SR-BSE-95-09;
SR-CHX-95-12; SR-NASD-95-24; SR-NYSE-95-19; SR-PSE-95-14; SR-Phlx-
95-34] (order approving rules setting forth depository eligibility
requirements for issuers seeking to have their shares listed on the
exchange).
    \14\ In 1996, the NYSE modified its listing criteria to permit
listed companies to issue securities in book-entry form provided
that the issue is included in DRS. Securities Exchange Act Release
No. 37937 (November 8, 1996), 61 FR 58728 (November 18, 1996), [File
No. SR-NYSE-96-29]. Similarly, the NASD modified its rule to require
that if an issuer establishes a direct registration program, it must
participate in an electronic link with a securities depository in
order to facilitate the electronic transfer of the issue. Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 39369 (November 26, 1997), 62 FR 64034
(December 3, 1997), [File No. SR-97-51]. On July 30, 2002, the
Commission approved a rule change proposed by the NYSE to amend NYSE
Section 501.01 of the NYSE Listed Company Manual to allow a listed
company to issue securities in a dematerialized or completely
immobilized form and therefore not send stock certificates to record
holders provided the company's stock is issued pursuant to a
dividend reinvestment program or a stock purchase plan or is
included in a DRS. Securities Exchange Act Release No. 46282 (July
30, 2002), 67 FR 50972 (August 6, 2002), [File No. SR-NYSE-2001-33].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While the U.S. markets have made great progress in immobilization
and dematerialization for institutional and broker-to-broker
transactions, many industry representatives believe that the small
percentage of securities held in certificated form (held mostly by
retail investors) impose unnecessary risk and disproportionately large
expense to the industry and to investors. In an attempt to help address
this issue, BSE's rule change, along with those of the NYSE, Amex,
Nasdaq, NYSE Arca, Phlx, and CHX, should help expand the use of DRS. As
a result, risks, costs, and processing inefficiencies associated with
the use of securities certificates should be reduced, and impediments
to the perfection of the national market system should be removed.
Additionally, those investors holding securities in listed securities
certificates covered by the rule change that decide to hold their
securities in DRS should realize the benefits of more accurate,
quicker, and more cost-efficient transfers; faster distribution of sale
proceeds; reduced number of lost or stolen certificates and a reduction
in the associated certificate replacement costs; and consistency of
owning in book-entry across asset classes.
    The Commission realizes that some issuers and transfer agents may
bear expenses related to complying with the rule change. In order to
make an issue DRS-eligible, issuers of listed companies must have a
transfer agent which is a DRS Limited Participants and may need to
amend their corporate governing documents to permit the issuance of
book-entry shares. The Commission believes, however, that the long-term
benefits of increased efficiencies and reduced costs and risks afforded
by DRS outweigh the costs that some issuers and transfer agents may
incur. Furthermore, the time frames built into the proposal should
allow issuers and their transfer agents sufficient time to make any
necessary changes to comply with the rule change.
    While the rule change should significantly reduce the number of
transactions in securities for which settlement is effected by the
physical delivery of securities certificates, it will not eliminate the
ability of investors to obtain securities certificates provided the
issuer has chosen to issue certificates. Such investors can continue to
contact the issuer's transfer agent, either directly or through their
broker-dealer, to obtain a securities certificate.
    Accordingly, for the reasons stated above the Commission finds that
the rule change is consistent with BSE's obligation under Section 6(b)
of the Act to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged
in regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect
to, and facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments
to perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, and in general to protect investors and the public
interest.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission
considered the proposal's impact on the efficiency, competition, and
capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Conclusion

    On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the
proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and
in particular with the requirements of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act and
the rules and regulations thereunder. It is therefore ordered, pursuant
to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, that the proposed rule change (File No.
SR-BSE-2006-46) be and hereby is approved.

    For the Commission by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-5190 Filed 3-21-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register: August 19, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 161)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 48312-48314]
[DOCID:fr19au08-28]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2008-0888; Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-084-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier Model CL-600-2B19 (Regional
Jet Series 100 & 440) Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This proposed AD results from mandatory
continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation
authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe
condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe
condition as:

    Bombardier Aerospace has completed a system safety review of the
CL-600-2B19 aircraft fuel system against new fuel tank safety
standards, * * *.
    This assessment showed that there is insufficient electrical
bonding for lightning protection at certain locations inside the
fuel tanks. In addition, the assessment also revealed that existing
bonding jumpers across self-bonded couplings are not required.
Insufficient electrical bonding, if not corrected, could result in
arcing and potential ignition source inside the fuel tank during
lightning strikes and consequent fuel tank explosion.

The proposed AD would require actions that are intended to address the
unsafe condition described in the MCAI.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by September 18,
2008.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-40, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is
in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket
shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mazdak Hobbi, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe and Propulsion Branch, ANE-171, FAA, New York Aircraft
Certification Office, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New
York 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2008-0888;
Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-084-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD based on those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation
authority for Canada, has issued Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-
2007-34, dated December 21, 2007 (referred to after this as ``the
MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The
MCAI states:

    Bombardier Aerospace has completed a system safety review of the
CL-600-2B19 aircraft fuel system against new fuel tank safety
standards, introduced in Chapter 525 of the Airworthiness Manual
through Notice of Proposed Amendment (NPA) 2002-043. The identified
non-compliances were assessed using Transport Canada Policy Letter
No. 525-001 to determine if mandatory corrective action is required.
    This assessment showed that there is insufficient electrical
bonding for lightning protection at certain locations inside the
fuel tanks. In addition, the assessment also revealed that existing
bonding jumpers across self-bonded couplings are not required.
Insufficient electrical bonding, if not corrected, could result in
arcing and potential ignition source inside the fuel tank during
lightning strikes and consequent fuel tank explosion.
    To correct the unsafe condition, this directive mandates the
modification of certain bonding jumpers inside the fuel tanks.

Corrective actions include, for certain airplanes, a general visual
inspection to determine if the modification has been done on both sides
of the airplane. You may obtain further information by examining the
MCAI in the AD docket.
    The FAA has examined the underlying safety issues involved in fuel
tank explosions on several large transport airplanes, including the
adequacy of existing regulations, the service history of airplanes
subject to those regulations, and existing maintenance practices for
fuel tank systems. As a result of those findings, we issued a
regulation titled ``Transport Airplane Fuel Tank System Design Review,
Flammability Reduction and Maintenance and Inspection Requirements''
(66 FR 23086, May 7, 2001). In addition to new airworthiness standards
for transport airplanes and new maintenance requirements, this rule
included Special Federal Aviation Regulation No. 88 (``SFAR 88,''
Amendment 21-78, and subsequent Amendments 21-82 and 21-83).
    Among other actions, SFAR 88 requires certain type design (i.e.,
type certificate (TC) and supplemental type certificate (STC)) holders
to substantiate that their fuel tank systems can prevent ignition
sources in the fuel tanks. This requirement applies to type design
holders for large turbine-powered transport airplanes and for
subsequent modifications to those airplanes. It requires them to
perform design reviews and to develop design changes and maintenance
procedures if their designs do not meet the new fuel tank safety
standards. As explained in the preamble to the rule, we intended to
adopt airworthiness directives to mandate any changes found necessary
to address unsafe conditions identified as a result of these reviews.
    In evaluating these design reviews, we have established four
criteria intended to define the unsafe conditions associated with fuel
tank systems that require corrective actions. The percentage of
operating time during which fuel tanks are exposed to flammable
conditions is one of these criteria. The other three criteria address
the failure types under evaluation:

Single failures, single failures in combination with a latent
condition(s), and in-service failure experience. For all four criteria,
the evaluations included consideration of previous actions taken that
may mitigate the need for further action.
    We have determined that the actions identified in this AD are
necessary to reduce the potential of ignition sources inside fuel
tanks, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result
in fuel tank explosions and consequent loss of the airplane.

Relevant Service Information

    Bombardier has issued Service Bulletin 601R-28-055, Revision E,
dated March 17, 2008. The actions described in this service information
are intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service
information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we
evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same
type design.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
    We might also have proposed different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are
highlighted in a NOTE within the proposed AD.

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this proposed AD
would affect about 686 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that
it would take about 18 work-hours per product to comply with the basic
requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $80 per
work-hour. Required parts would cost about $0 per product. Where the
service information lists required parts costs that are covered under
warranty, we have assumed that there will be no charge for these costs.
As we do not control warranty coverage for affected parties, some
parties may incur costs higher than estimated here. Based on these
figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD on U.S. operators to
be $987,840, or $1,440 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. ``Subtitle VII: Aviation
Programs,'' describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's
authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
``Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

    1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

Bombardier, Inc. (Formerly Canadair): Docket No. FAA-2008-0888;
Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-084-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by September 18, 2008.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Bombardier Model CL-600-2B19 (Regional
Jet Series 100 & 440) airplanes, serial numbers 7003 through 7067,
and 7069 through 7929, certificated in any category.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 28: Fuel.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:

    Bombardier Aerospace has completed a system safety review of the
CL-600-2B19 aircraft fuel system against new fuel tank safety
standards, introduced in Chapter 525 of the Airworthiness Manual
through Notice of Proposed Amendment (NPA) 2002-043. The identified
non-compliances were assessed using Transport Canada Policy Letter
No. 525-001 to determine if mandatory corrective action is required.
    This assessment showed that there is insufficient electrical
bonding for lightning protection at certain locations inside the
fuel tanks. In addition, the assessment also revealed that existing
bonding jumpers across self-bonded couplings are not required.
Insufficient electrical bonding, if not corrected, could result in
arcing and potential ignition source inside the fuel tank during
lightning strikes and consequent fuel tank explosion.
    To correct the unsafe condition, this directive mandates the
modification of certain bonding jumpers inside the fuel tanks.

Corrective actions include, for certain airplanes, a general visual
inspection to determine if the modification has been done on both
sides of the airplane.

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Unless already done: Within 5,000 flight hours after the
effective date of this AD, do the following actions.

    (1) For airplanes on which none of the Bombardier service
bulletins identified in Table 1 of this AD have been incorporated as
of the effective date of this AD: Modify the fuel tank bonding
jumpers inside the wing and center fuel tanks in accordance with
Part A of the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service
Bulletin 601R-28-055, Revision E, dated March 17, 2008.

                                           Table 1--Service Bulletins
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Bombardier Service Bulletin                   Revision                              Date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
601R-28-055..............................  Original....................  May 4, 2004.
601R-28-055..............................  A...........................  February 14, 2005.
601R-28-055..............................  B...........................  September 14, 2005.
601R-28-055..............................  C...........................  January 9, 2006.
601R-28-055..............................  D...........................  July 17, 2006.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) For airplanes on which any Bombardier service bulletin
identified in Table 1 of this AD has been incorporated as of the
effective date of this AD: Do a general visual inspection of the
inside of the wing and center fuel tanks to determine if the actions
in Part A of the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service
Bulletin 601R-28-055, Revision E, dated March 17, 2008, have been
done on both sides of the airplane. If Part A of the service
bulletin has not been done on either side of the airplane, before
further flight, do the actions specified in Part A of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-28-
055, Revision E, dated March 17, 2008, for the side of the airplane
on which Part A of the service bulletin has not been done.

FAA AD Differences

    Note: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows:
    (1) The Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service
Bulletin 601R-28-055, Revision E, dated March 17, 2008, do not
specify corrective actions if Revision D, dated July 17, 2006, of
the service bulletin was incorporated. This AD refers to
incorporation of Revision E of the service bulletin for the actions
specified in paragraph (f)(2) of this AD. Revision E specifies
inspecting to determine if the modification is done on both sides of
the airplane.
    (2) The MCAI specifies that the modification must be done on all
airplanes in accordance with Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-28-
055, Revision D, dated July 17, 2006, and that accomplishing the
original issue, dated May 4, 2004; Revision A, dated February 14,
2005; and Revision B, dated September 14, 2005; of the service
bulletin does not satisfy the requirements. This AD requires doing
the modification on airplanes on which Revision D or any earlier
issue of the service bulletin has not been done. For airplanes on
which Revision D or any earlier issue of the service bulletin has
been done, this AD requires inspecting to determine if the
modification is done on both sides of the airplane and modifying the
airplane if the modification was not done on both sides.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found
in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Mazdak Hobbi, Aerospace
Engineer, Airframe and Propulsion Branch, ANE-171, FAA, New York
Aircraft Certification Office, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410,
Westbury, New York 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax (516) 794-
5531. Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the
AMOC applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in
the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI,
your local FSDO.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information
collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-
0056.

Related Information

    (h) Refer to MCAI Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2007-34,
dated December 21, 2007; and Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-28-
055, Revision E, dated March 17, 2008; for related information.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 6, 2008.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E8-19167 Filed 8-18-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 164 (Wednesday, August 24, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 57896]
[FR Doc No: 2016-20280]

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

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: ER16-1609-001.
    Applicants: ID SOLAR 1, LLC.
    Description: Report Filing: Supplement to 2 to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 8/17/16.
    Accession Number: 20160817-5350.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-1888-002.
    Applicants: Tidal Energy Marketing Inc.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Amendment to be effective 8/6/2016.
    Filed Date: 8/17/16.
    Accession Number: 20160817-5330.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/31/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2436-000.
    Applicants: Mesquite Solar 3, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Notice of Non-Material
Change in Status to be effective 5/20/2016.
    Filed Date: 8/16/16.
    Accession Number: 20160816-5228.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/6/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2437-000.
    Applicants: Alcoa Power Generating Inc.
    Description: Alcoa Power Generating Inc. (Tapoca Division) submits
Request for Waiver of Order No. 1000 Requirements.
    Filed Date: 8/16/16.
    Accession Number: 20160816-5272.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/6/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2438-000.
    Applicants: Pedricktown Cogeneration Company LP.
    Description: Compliance filing: Reactive Service Resubmittal to be
effective 9/13/2016.
    Filed Date: 8/17/16.
    Accession Number: 20160817-5382.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2439-000.
    Applicants: H.A. Wagner LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Reactive Tariff Resubmittal to be
effective 9/13/2016.
    Filed Date: 8/17/16.
    Accession Number: 20160817-5386.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/7/16.

    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: August 17, 2016.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-20280 Filed 8-23-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


3196 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 13 / Friday, January 21, 2005 / Notices ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ OPPT   2004   0117; FRL   78627; Docket ID # OPPT   2004   0117]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Correction of Misreported Chemical Substances on the Toxic Substances Control Act ( TSCA) Chemical Substances Inventory; EPA ICR No. 1741.04, OMB No. 2070   0145 AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act ( 44 U. S. C. 3501 et seq.), this document announces that the following Information Collection Request ( ICR) has been forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget ( OMB) for review and approval. This is a request to renew an existing approved collection. This ICR is scheduled to expire on January 31, 2005. Under OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor the collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB. This ICR describes the nature of the information collection and its estimated cost. DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before February 22, 2005. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing docket ID Number OPPT   2004   0117, to ( 1) EPA online using EDOCKET ( our preferred method), by email to oppt. ncic@ epa. gov or by mail to: Document Control Office ( DCO), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics ( OPPT), Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code: 7407T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460, and ( 2) OMB at: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget ( OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara Cunningham, Acting Director, Environmental Assistance Division, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 7408, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: 202   554   1404; e mail address: TSCAHotline epa. gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR 1320.12. On October 22, 2004, EPA sought comments on this renewal ICR ( 69 FR 62043). EPA sought comments on this ICR pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8( d). EPA received one comment during the comment period, which is addressed in the Supporting Statement of the ICR. EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID No. OPPT   2004   0117, which is available for public viewing at the OPPT Docket in the EPA Docket Center ( EPA/ DC), EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8 a. m. to 4: 30 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is 202   566   1744, and the telephone number for the Pollution Prevention and Toxics Docket is 202   566   0280. An electronic version of the public docket is available through EPA Dockets ( EDOCKET) at http:// www. epa. gov/ edocket. Use EDOCKET to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Once in the system, select `` search,'' then key in the docket ID number identified above. Any comments related to this ICR should be submitted to EPA and OMB within 30 days of this notice. EPA's policy is that public comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available for public viewing in EDOCKET as EPA receives them and without change, unless the comment contains copyrighted material, CBI, or other information whose public disclosure is restricted by statute. When EPA identifies a comment containing copyrighted material, EPA will provide a reference to that material in the version of the comment that is placed in EDOCKET. The entire printed comment, including the copyrighted material, will be available in the public docket. Although identified as an item in the official docket, information claimed as CBI, or whose disclosure is otherwise restricted by statute, is not included in the official public docket, and will not be available for public viewing in EDOCKET. For further information about the electronic docket, see EPA's Federal Register notice describing the electronic docket at 67 FR 38102 ( May 31, 2002), or go to http:// www. epa. gov/ edocket. Title: Correction of Misreported Chemical Substances on the Toxic Substances Control Act ( TSCA) Chemical Substances Inventory. Abstract: Section 8( b) of the TSCA requires EPA to compile and keep current an Inventory of Chemical Substances in Commerce, which is a listing of chemical substances manufactured, imported, and processed for commercial purposes in the United States. The purpose of the Inventory is to define, for the purpose of TSCA, what chemical substances exist in U. S. commerce. Since the Inventory thereby performs a regulatory function by distinguishing between existing chemicals and new chemicals, which TSCA regulates in different ways, it is imperative that the Inventory be accurate. However, from time to time, EPA or respondents discover that substances have been incorrectly described by reporting companies. Reported substances have been unintentionally misidentified as a result of simple typographical errors, the misidentification of substances, or the lack of sufficient technical or analytical capabilities to characterize fully the exact chemical substances. EPA has developed guidelines ( 45 FR 50544, July 29, 1980) under which incorrectly described substances listed in the Inventory can be corrected. The correction mechanism ensures the accuracy of the Inventory without imposing an unreasonable burden on the chemical industry. Without the Inventory correction mechanism, a company that submitted incorrect information would have to file a premanufacture notification ( PMN) under TSCA section 5 to place the correct chemical substance on the Inventory whenever the previously reported substance is found to be misidentified. This would impose a much greater burden on both EPA and the submitter than the existing correction mechanism. Responses to the collection of information are voluntary. Respondents may claim all or part of a notice as CBI. EPA will disclose information that is covered by a CBI claim only to the extent permitted by, and in accordance with, the procedures in 40 CFR part 2. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register, are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and included on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 2 hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort or financial resources expended VerDate jul< 14> 2003 14: 11 Jan 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 21JAN1. SGM 21JAN1 3197 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 13 / Friday, January 21, 2005 / Notices by persons to generate, maintain, retain or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. Respondents/ Affected Entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are companies that manufacture or import chemical substances, mixtures or categories listed on the TSCA Inventory and regulated under TSCA section 8, who reported to the initial effort to establish the TSCA Inventory in 1979, and who need to make a correction to that submission. Frequency of Collection: On occasion. Estimated Total/ Average Number of Responses for Each Respondent: 1. Estimated No. of Respondents: 10. Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 20 hours. Estimated Total Annual Costs: $ 1,467. Changes in Burden Estimates: This request reflects a decrease of 180 hours ( from 200 hours to 20 hours) in the total estimated respondent burden from that currently in the OMB inventory. This decrease is due to a downward reestimation of the anticipated number of annual responses to this information collection, offset in part by an upward estimation of the burden per response. This change is an adjustment.

Dated: January 11, 2005. Oscar Morales, Director, Collection Strategies Division. [ FR Doc. 05   1121 Filed 1   19   05; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ ER   FRL   6659   8]

Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability Responsible Agency: Office of FederalActivities, General Information ( 202) 564   7167 or http:// www. epa. gov/ compliance/ nepa/. Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements. Filed January 10, 2005 through January 14, 2005. Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9. EIS No. 050011, DRAFT EIS, FAA, VA, Washington Dulles International Airport Project, Acquisition of Land, Construction and Operation, IAD 2004. Airport Layout Plan ( ALP), Dulles, VA. Comment Period Ends: March 7, 2005. Contact: Brad Mehaffy ( 703) 661   1364. EIS No. 050012, DRAFT EIS, IBR, CA, Central Valley Project Long Term Water Service Contract. Renewals   American River Division, Proposes to Renew Long Term Water Service Contracts, Sacramento, Placer and El Dorado Counties, CA, Comment Period Ends: March 7, 2005. Contact: David Robinson ( 916) 989   7179. EIS No. 050013, FINAL EIS, FHW, MN, MN   371 North Improvement Project, Reconstruction from the intersection of Crow Wing County Road 18 in Nisswa to the Intersection of Cass County Road 42 in Pine River, Funding, NPDES Permit , and U. S. Army, COE Section 404 Permit Issuance, Crow Wing and Cass Counties, MN, Wait Period Ends: February 22, 2005. Contact: Cheryl Martin ( 651) 291   6120. EIS No. 050014, DRAFT EIS, FAA, CA, Los Angeles International Airport Proposed Master Plan Improvements, Alternative D Selected, Enhanced Safety and Security Plan, Los Angeles County, CA, Wait Period Ends: February 22, 2005. Contact: David B. Kessler ( 310) 725   3615. EIS No. 050015, DRAFT EIS, EPA, CA, LA   3 Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site off Newport Bay, Proposed Site Designation, Orange County, CA, Comment Period Ends: March 7, 2005. Contact: Lawrence J. Smith ( 213) 452   3846. The Environmental Protection Agency's and the Corp of Engineers are Joint Lead Agencies for the above Project. EIS No. 050016, DRAFT EIS, FHW, OH, OH   823, Portsmouth Bypass Project, Transportation Improvements, Funding and U. S. Army COE Section 404 Permit, Appalachian Development Highway, Scioto County, OH, Due: March 07, 2005. Contact: Dennis A. Decker ( 614) 280   6896.

Amended Notices EIS No. 040557, DRAFT EIS, AFS, AK, Tuxekan Island Timber Sale( s) Project, Harvesting Timber, Coast Guard Bridge Permit and U. S. Army COE Section 10 and 404 Permits, Tongass National Forest, Thorne Bay Ranger District, Thorne Bay, AK., Comment Period Ends: March 7, 2005. Contact: Forrest Cole ( 907) 228   6200. Revision of FR Notice published on 12/ 10/ 2004: CEQ Comment Period Ending 01/ 24/ 2005 has been reestablished to 3/ 7/ 2005. Due to submission of replacement copies of appendix B and C.

Dated: January 14, 2005. B. Katherine Biggs, Associate Director, Office of Federal Activities. [ FR Doc. 05   1149 Filed 1   19   05; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ ER   FRL   6659   7]

Public Comment Requested on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Proposed Site Designation of the `` LA   3'' Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site off Newport Bay, Orange County, CA AGENCY: U. S. Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA) and U. S. Army Corps of Engineers ( USACE). ACTION: Notice of Availability and request for public comment on a draft Environmental Impact Statement ( EIS) to designate `` LA   3'' as a permanent ocean dredged material disposal site ( ODMDS) offshore of Newport Bay, California.

The EIS also re evaluates an annual disposal volume limit for the existing LA   2 ODMDS offshore of the Los Angeles and Long Beach Harbors, and how to minimize cumulative environmental impacts from the two ODMDS in the region. EPA has the authority to designate ODMDS under Section 102 of the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act ( MPRSA) of 1972 ( 33 U. S. C. 1401 et seq.). It is EPA's policy to prepare NEPA documents for all ODMDS designations ( 63 FR 58045, October 1998). The USACE, as a cooperating agency for this action, received Congressional appropriations to fund this site designation, and managed contracts for field studies and preparation of the draft EIS. Public comments on this draft EIS evaluation will be accepted for 45 days from the date of this notice.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION AND/ OR TO SUBMIT COMMENTS, CONTACT: Mr. Allan Ota, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9, Dredging and Sediment Management Team ( WTR   8), 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California 94105   3901, Telephone: ( 415) 972   3476 or FAX: ( 415) 947   3537 or E mail: R9   LA3   DEIS@ epa. gov.

VerDate jul< 14> 2003 14: 11 Jan 19, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 21JAN1. SGM 21JAN1


[Federal Register: August 18, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 159)]
[Notices]
[Page 51161-51163]
[DOCID:fr18au10-184]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) Approvals and
Disapprovals

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Monthly Notice of PFC Approvals and Disapprovals. In July 2010,
there were seven applications approved. This notice also includes
information on one application, approved in May 2010, inadvertently
left off the May 2010 notice. Additionally, 13 approved amendments to
previously approved applications are listed.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA publishes a monthly notice, as appropriate, of PFC
approvals and disapprovals under the provisions of the Aviation Safety
and Capacity Expansion Act of 1990 (Title IX of the Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act of 1990) (Pub. L. 101-508) and Part 158 of the
Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 158). This notice is
published pursuant to paragraph d of Sec.  158.29.

PFC Applications Approved

    Public Agency: Norfolk Airport Authority, Norfolk, Virginia.
    Application Number: 10-02-C-00-ORF.
    Application Type: Impose and use a PFC.
    PFC Level: $4.50.
    Total PFC Revenue Approved in This Decision: $37,450,521.
    Earliest Charge Effective Date: September 1, 2010.
    Estimated Charge Expiration Date: September 1, 2015.
    Class of Air Carriers Not Required To Collect PFCs: Air taxi/
commercial operators filing FAA Form 1800-31.
    Determination: Approved. Based on information contained in the
public agency's application, the FAA has determined that the proposed
class accounts for less than 1 percent of the total annual enplanements
at Norfolk International Airport.
    Brief Description of Project Approved for Collection and Use: PFC
consulting services.
    Brief Description of Project Partially Approved for Collection and
Use: Arrivals terminal.
    Determination: Partially approved. The FAA determined that several
spaces shown in the terminal floor plan schematics, were not for public
use and, therefore, were not approved for use of PFC revenue. The total
amount of space identified as ineligible was 6,435 square feet. As a
result, the FAA approved 72.5 percent of the project cost rather than
the 76.3 percent requested by the public agency.
    Brief Description of Withdrawn Projects:

Blast barrier.
Land acquisition.
Access control.
Electrical vault relocation.
Relocate fire station.
Radio controls, runway end identifier lights and precision approach
path indicator systems.
By-pass taxiway and hold apron.
Master plan update.
Airfield signage.
Upgrade aircraft rescue and firefighting training facility.
Acquire aircraft rescue and firefighting vehicles.
Snow removal equipment.
Pavement management plan.
Apron lighting.
Rehabilitate runway 5/23.
Relocate airport beacon.
Navigational aids--runway 5/23.
Environmental impact statement, 5R123L.
Preliminary engineering, access road security fence.
Construct perimeter access road.
Security related mandates.
Concourse A and B.
Overlay taxiway C and connectors.
Engineer/design airfield signage.
Rehabilitate taxiway A and general aviation ramp.

    Date of withdrawal: April 23, 2010.
    Decision Date: May 28, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Breedon, Washington Airports
District Office,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Public Agency: Border Coast Regional Airport Authority, Crescent
City, California.

    Application Number: 10-04-C-00-CEC.
    Application Type: Impose and use a PFC.
    PFC Level: $4.50.
    Total PFC Revenue Approved in This Decision: $96,221.
    Earliest Charge Effective Date: July 1, 2013.
    Estimated Charge Expiration Date: July 1, 2018.
    Class of Air Carriers Not Required To Collect PFCs: Nonscheduled/on
demand air carriers filing FAA Form 1800-31.
    Determination: Approved. Based on information contained in the
public agency's application, the FAA has determined that the proposed
class accounts for less than 1 percent of the total annual enplanements
at Jack McNamara Field.
    Brief Description of Projects Approved for Collection and Use:

Installation of security fencing, phase IV.
Rehabilitate runways 11/29 and 17/35.
Environmental assessment/environmental impact report for runway safety
area improvements.
Preliminary engineering support for the environmental assessment/
environmental impact report of the runway safety area improvements.
Wildlife hazard management plan.

    Cultural resource consultation and environmental documentations.

    Decision Date: July 13, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gretchen Kelly, San Francisco Airports
District Office,<PHONE_NUMBER>, extension 623.
    Public Agency: City of Billings Aviation and Transit Department,
Billings, Montana.
    Application Number: 10-06-C-00-BIL.
    Application Type: Impose and use a PFC.
    PFC Level: $3.00.
    Total PFC Revenue Approved in This Decision: $2,856,620.
    Earliest Charge Effective Date: October 1, 2010.
    Estimated Charge Expiration Date: July 1, 2013.
    Class of Air Carriers Not Required To Collect PFCs: None.
    Brief Description of Projects Approved for Collection and Use:

Reconstruct Gate B-4 aircraft parking apron.
Acquire handicap passenger lift device.
Reconstruct general aviation ramps.
Acquire emergency response unit.
Rehabilitate general aviation east--north apron.
Construct new vehicle service road east.

    Decision Date: July 15, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dave Stelling, Helena Airports
District Office,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Public Agency: County of San Joaquin, Stockton, California.
    Application Number: 10-04-C-00-SCK.
    Application Type: Impose and use a PFC.
    PFC Level: $4.50.
    Total PFC Revenue Approved in This Decision: $266,523.
    Earliest Charge Effective Date: September 1, 2010.
    Estimated Charge Expiration Date: September 1, 2011.
    Class of Air Carriers Not Required To Collect PFCs: Nonscheduled/on
demand air carriers filing FAA Form 1800-31.
    Determination: Approved. Based on information contained in the
public agency's application, the FAA has determined that the proposed
class accounts for less than 1 percent of the total annual enplanements
at Stockton Metropolitan Airport.
    Brief Description of Projects Approved for Collection and Use:

Master plan study update.
Rehabilitate runway 11 RJ29L.
Rehabilitate general aviation apron, phases I and II.
Design terminal holdroom modifications.
Aircraft rescue and firefighting station modifications.
Rehabilitate taxiways H and J.

    Decision Date: July 16, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gretchen Kelly, San Francisco Airports
District Office,<PHONE_NUMBER>, extension 623.
    Public Agency: County and City of Yakima, Washington.
    Application Number: 10-13-C-00-YKM.
    Application Type: Impose and use a PFC.
    PFC Level: $4.50.
    Total PFC Revenue Approved in This Decision: $178,995.
    Earliest Charge Effective Date: April 1, 2011.
    Estimated Charge Expiration Date: August 1, 2012.
    Class of Air Carriers Not Required To Collect PFCs: Nonscheduled/on
demand air carriers filing FAA Form 1800-31.
    Determination: Approved. Based on information contained in the
public agency's application, the FAA has determined that the proposed
class accounts for less than 1 percent of the total annual enplanements
at Yakima Air Terminal/McAllister Field.
    Brief Description of Projects Approved for Collection and Use:

Taxiway centerline marking.
Runway 9/27 rehabilitation (design).
Runway 9/27 rehabilitation (construction).
Master plan update.

    Decision Date: July 16, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Trang Tran, Seattle Airports District
Office,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Public Agency: City of Pocatello, Idaho.
    Application Number: 10-06-C-00-PIH.
    Application Type: Impose and use a PFC.
    PFC Level: $4.50.
    Total PFC Revenue Approved in This Decision: $465,250.
    Earliest Charge Effective Date: June 1, 2011.
    Estimated Charge Expiration Date: December 1, 2016.
    Class of Air Carriers Not Required To Collect PFCs: Nonscheduled/on
demand air carriers filing FAA Form 1800-31.
    Determination: Approved. Based on information contained in the
public agency's application, the FAA has determined that the proposed
class accounts for less than 1 percent of the total annual enplanements
at Pocatello Regional Airport.
    Brief Description of Projects Approved for Collection and Use:

Master plan update.
Purchase snow removal equipment.
Security enhancements.
Rehabilitate runway 17/35.
Purchase aircraft rescue and firefighting vehicle.
PFC administration costs.

    Decision Date: July 21, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Trang Iran, Seattle Airports District
Office,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Public Agency: County of Wicomico, Salisbury, Maryland.
    Application Number: 10-03-C-00-SBY.
    Application Type: Impose and use a PFC.
    PFC Level: $4.50.
    Total PFC Revenue Approved in This Decision: $783,269.
    Earliest Charge Effective Date: June 1, 2012.
    Estimated Charge Expiration Date: June 1, 2015.
    Class of Air Carriers Not Required To Collect PFCs: Air carriers
required to file FAA Form 1800-31.
    Determination: Approved. Based on information contained in the
public agency's application, the FAA has determined that the proposed
class accounts for less than 1 percent of the total annual enplanements
at Salisbury--Ocean City, Wicomico Regional Airport.

    Brief Description of Projects Approved for Collection and Use:

Remove obstructions, runway 5/23.
Extend runway 14/3 1 construction phase 1.
Construct airport rotating beacon.
Develop PFC application.
Extend runway 14/32 construction phase 2.
Rehabilitate north taxiway C apron.
Refurbish and acquire snow removal equipment.
Rehabilitate taxiway E (design).
Rehabilitate runway 5/23 (design).
Rehabilitate taxiway E (construction).
Rehabilitate runway 5/23 (construction).
Airport master plan update.

    Decision Date: July 21, 2010.

For Further Information Contact: Jeffrey Breedon, Washington Airports
District Office,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Public Agency: Palm Beach Board of County Commissioners, West Palm
Beach, Florida.
    Application Number: 10-1 1-C-00-PBI.
    Application Type: Impose and use a PFC.
    PFC Level: $4.50.
    Total PFC Revenue Approved in This Decision: $32,909,846.
    Earliest Charge Effective Date: September 1, 2010.
    Estimated Charge Expiration Date: May 1, 2013.
    Class of Air Carriers Not Required To Collect PFCs: Air taxi/
commercial operators filing FAA Form 1800-31.
    Determination: Approved. Based on information contained in the
public agency's application, the FAA has determined that the proposed
class accounts for less than 1 percent of the total annual enplanements
at Palm Beach International Airport (PBI).
    Brief Description of Projects Approved for Collection at PBI and
Use at PBI at a $4.50 PFC Level:

Construct taxiway exit C4 and shoulders.
Runway 1OL/28R rehabilitation.
Taxiway A rehabilitation.
Runway 14/32 safety area improvements; engineered materials arresting
system.

    Brief Description of Projects Approved for Collection at PBI and
Use at PBI at a $3.00 PFC Level:

Baggage system improvements--design and construction, phase 1.
Airfield lighting control and monitoring system.
Terminal flooring improvements.
Terminal roof improvements.
PFC implementation and administrative costs.

    Brief Description of Withdrawn Project: West side access road.
    Date of Withdrawal: July 20, 2010.
    Decision Date: July 22, 2010.

For Further Information Contact: Susan Moore, Orlando Airports District
Office,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

                                           Amendments to PFC Approvals
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Original         Amended
                                     Amendment       Original         Amended        estimated       estimated
   Amendment No., city, State      approved date   approved net    approved net     charge exp.     charge exp.
                                                    PFC revenue     PFC revenue        date            date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
01-01-C-01-SHD, Weyers Cave, VA.        06/28/10        $207,875         $87,482        12/01/06        12/01/06
03-03-C-02-RAP, Rapid City, SD..        06/30/10       2,256,111       2,219,809        05/01/07        05/01/07
03-06-C-04-DSM, Des Moines, IA..        07/07/10      11,700,000      11,732,977        04/01/08        04/01/08
02-02-C-03-AVL, Asheville, NC...        07/07/10       4,936,653       4,916,517        11/01/06        11/01/06
00-02-I-02-HXD, Hilton Head, SC.        07/07/10       2,076,657       1,380,509        10/01/07        10/01/07
00-03-U-01-HXD, Hilton Head, SC.        07/07/10              NA              NA        10/01/07        10/01/07
01-02-C-03-HVN, New Haven, CT...        07/20/10         572,848         567,286        07/01/05        07/01/05
06-03-C-03-HVN, New Haven, CT...        07/20/10         805,753         780,834        05/01/09        05/01/09
05-02-C-02-SBY, Salisbury, MD...        07/21/10       1,386,715         921,866        06/01/12        06/01/12
08-17-C-01-BDL, Windsor Locks,          07/26/10      11,260,335      11,357,591        07/01/21        07/01/21
 CT.............................
94-02-C-01-ACV, Arcata, CA......        07/27/10         369,500         503,521        11/01/96        11/01/96
96-03-C-01-ACV, Arcata, CA......        07/27/10         225,258         263,779        11/01/97        11/01/97
03-05-C-01-ACV, Arcata, CA......        07/27/10          93,000          95,412        07/01/03        07/01/03
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 10, 2010.
Joe Hebert,
Manager, Financial Analysis and Passenger Facility Charge Branch.
[FR Doc. 2010-20228 Filed 8-17-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M


[Federal Register: February 24, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 36)]
[Notices]
[Page 8330]
[DOCID:fr24fe10-68]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 3156-029]

Miller and Miller; Notice of Termination of License by Implied
Surrender and Soliciting Comments, Protests, and Motions To Intervene

February 17, 2010.
    Take notice that the following hydroelectric proceeding has been
initiated by the Commission:

    a. Type of Proceeding: Termination of license by implied surrender.
    b. Project No.: 3156-029.
    c. Date Initiated: February 3, 2010.
    d. Licensee: The licensee is Miller and Miller.
    e. Name and Location of Project: The constructed 280-kilowatt
Worthville Dam Project is located on the Deep River in Randolph County,
North Carolina.
    f. Filed Pursuant to: 18 CFR 6.4.
    g. Licensee Contact Information: Mr. Ernest Miller, Miller and
Miller, 122 East Lindsay St., P.O. Box 20561, Greensboro, NC 27401, Mr.
Ernest W. Miller, 6001 Pelican Bay Blvd, Naples, FL 34108-8166, Mr. H.
Bruce Cox, Cox Hydroelectric, 5666 Hinshaw Town Road, Ramseur, NC
27316, and Mr. Mark K. Seifert, 107 Saint Brides Court, Cary, North
Carolina 27518.
    h. FERC Contact: Robert Bell,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. Deadline for Filing Comments, Protests, and Motions To
Intervene: March 19, 2010.
    All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with the,
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. Comments, protests and interventions may be filed
electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
under the ``e-Filing'' link. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings. Please include the project number (P-3156-029) on
any documents or motions filed.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all
intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of
that document on each person in the official service list for the
project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the
Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the
responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve
a copy of the document on that resource agency.
    j. Description of Existing Facilities: The constructed project
consists of the following existing facilities: (1) An existing dam 230
feet long and 20 feet high, (2) an existing reservoir with a surface
area of 305 acres and a storage capacity of 105 acre-feet, (3) a
proposed 280 kW generator and turbine installation, and appurtenant
facilities. The Worthville Dam Project would be operated as a run-of-
the-river facility with an average annual generation of 0.84 GWh. Power
generated at the project would be sold to Carolina Power and Light
Company via a transmission line less than 200 yards long.
    k. Description of Proceeding: 18 CFR 6.4 of the Commission's
regulations provides, among other things, that it is deemed to be the
intent of a licensee to surrender a license, if the licensee abandons a
project for a period of three years.
    A license for the Worthville Project was issued by Order Issuing
License on October 28, 1982 (21 FERC ] 62,112) and was transfered to
Miller and Miller on June 25, 1986. The project has been non-
operational since May 1995. The Commission has requested that the
license file the detailed plan and schedule to put the project back
into operation numerous times. These requests have been made by letters
dated September 29, 1999, September 28, 2001, August 29, 2003, November
20, 2003, January 26, 2006, September 18, 2008, and most recently
December 16, 2009. No plan and schedule have been filed.
    On January 15, 2010, the licensee requested a 90 day extension of
time to provide the requested information. This request was denied on
February 4, 2010, stating that the Commission proposes to terminate the
license by implied surrender
    To date, the licensee has not made the necessary repairs to resume
operations at the project and the project is hereby considered
abandoned.
    l. Location of the Order: A copy of the order is available for
inspection and reproduction at the Commission in the Public Reference
Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://
www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number
excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3676 or e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene--Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission
will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who
file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules
may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or
motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified
comment date for the proceeding.
    Comments, protests and interventions may be filed electronically
via the Internet in lieu of paper; See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and
the instructions on the Commission's Web site under ``e-filing'' link.
The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing.
    o. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents--Any filings must
bear in all capital letters the title ``COMMENTS'', ``PROTEST'', or
``MOTION TO INTERVENE'', and ``RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TERMS AND
CONDITIONS'', as applicable, and the Project Number of the proceeding.
Any of the above-named documents must be filed by providing the
original and the number of copies provided by the Commission's
regulations to: The Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. An additional copy must be
sent to Director, Division of Hydropower Administration and Compliance,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, at the above-mentioned address.
    p. Agency Comments--Federal, state, and local agencies are invited
to file comments on the described proceeding. If an agency does not
file comments within the time specified for filing comments, it will be
presumed to have no comments.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-3625 Filed 2-23-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 120 (Wednesday, June 24, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30077-30080]
[FR Doc No: E9-14735]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0342; FRL-8422-4]

Registration Review; Pesticide Dockets Opened for Review and
Comment; Closure of the Terpineols Registration Review Case

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: EPA has established registration review dockets for the
pesticides listed in the table in Unit III.A. With this document, EPA
is opening the public comment period for these registration reviews.
Registration review is EPA's periodic review of pesticide registrations
to ensure that each pesticide continues to satisfy the statutory
standard for registration, that is, the pesticide can perform its
intended function without unreasonable adverse effects on human health
or the environment. Registration review dockets contain information
that will assist the public in understanding the types of information
and issues that the Agency may consider during the course of
registration reviews. Through this program, EPA is ensuring that each
pesticide's registration is based on current scientific and other
knowledge, including its effects on human health and the environment.
This document also announces the Agency's intent not to open a
registration review docket for terpineols. This pesticide does not
currently have any actively registered

pesticide products and is not, therefore, scheduled for review under
the registration review program.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 24, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments identified by the docket identification
(ID) number for the specific pesticide of interest provided in the
table in Unit III.A., by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket Facility's normal hours of operation (8:30
a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays).
Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. The Docket Facility telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to the docket ID numbers listed
in the table in Unit III.A. for the pesticides you are commenting on.
EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
docket without change and may be made available on-line at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or e-mail. The
regulations.gov website is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means
EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment
directly to EPA without going through regulations.gov, your e-mail
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the docket index
available at http://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet
and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly
available docket materials are available either in the electronic
docket at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard
copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac
Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The hours of
operation of this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For pesticide specific information
contact: The Chemical Review Manager identified in the table in Unit
III.A. for the pesticide of interest.
    For general information contact: Kevin Costello, Special Review and
Reregistration Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

 A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

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

 B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
    3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to achieve environmental
justice, the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of any group,
including minority and/or low income populations, in the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies. To help address potential environmental justice issues, the
Agency seeks information on any groups or segments of the population
who, as a result of their location, cultural practices, or other
factors, may have atypical or disproportionately high and adverse human
health impacts or environmental effects from exposure to the pesticides
discussed in this document, compared to the general population.

II. Authority

    EPA is initiating its reviews of the pesticides identified in this
document pursuant to section 3(g) of the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Procedural Regulations
for Registration Review at 40 CFR part 155, subpart C. Section 3(g) of
FIFRA provides, among other things, that the registrations of
pesticides are to be reviewed every 15 years. Under FIFRA section 3(a),
a pesticide product may be registered or remain registered only if it
meets the statutory standard for registration given in FIFRA section
3(c)(5). When used in accordance with widespread and commonly
recognized practice, the pesticide product must perform its intended
function without unreasonable adverse effects on the environment; that
is, without any unreasonable risk to man or the environment, or a human
dietary risk from residues that result from the use of a pesticide in
or on food.

III. Registration Reviews

 A. What Action is the Agency Taking?

    As directed by FIFRA section 3(g), EPA is reviewing the pesticide
registrations identified in the table in this unit to assure that they
continue to satisfy the FIFRA standard for registration--that is, they
can still be used without unreasonable adverse effects on human health
or the environment. A pesticide's registration review begins when the
Agency establishes a docket for the pesticide's registration review
case and opens the docket for public review and comment. At present,
EPA is opening registration review dockets for the cases identified in
the following table.

               Table--Registration Review Dockets Opening
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Chemical Review
  Registration Review Case Name                       Manager, Telephone
           and Number              Docket ID Number     Number, E-mail
                                                            Address
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Boric Acid and Sodium Borate      EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-03  Russell Wasem,
 Salts 0024                        06<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>------------------------------------------------------------------------
Butylate 0071                     EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-08  Jacqueline Guerry,
                                   82<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>------------------------------------------------------------------------
Daminozide 0032                   EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-02  Andrea Carone,
                                   42<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>------------------------------------------------------------------------
DDVP 0310                         EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-02  Joy Schnackenbeck,
                                   09<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fosthiazate 7604                  EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-02  James Parker,
                                   67<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>------------------------------------------------------------------------
Glyphosate 0178                   EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-01  John Pates, (703)
                                   47                  308-8195,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>------------------------------------------------------------------------
Malathion 0248                    EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-03  Eric Miederhoff,
                                   17<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>------------------------------------------------------------------------
Methyl Parathion 0153             EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-03  Kelly Ballard,
                                   32<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phosmet 0242                      EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-03  Katie Weyrauch,
                                   16<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phostebupirim 7606                EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-09  Wilhelmena
                                   40                  Livingston, (703)
                                                       308-8025,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sulfuryl Fluoride 0176            EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-01  Dana Friedman,
                                   36<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Agency is also announcing that it will not conduct a
registration review for terpineols (registration review case 3139). In
October 2006, the Agency issued schedules for upcoming registration
reviews and included terpineols as one of the pesticides scheduled for
registration review. Since first identifying terpineols as a
Registration Review pesticide, the Agency has determined that there are
no current terpineols Section 3 or Section 24(c) registrations.
Therefore, the Agency has determined that terpineols is no longer
subject to registration review. A Registration Review docket will not
be opened for terpineols and the terpineols registration review case
has been closed pursuant to 40 CFR 155.42(c).

 B. Docket Content

    1. Review dockets. The registration review dockets contain
information that the Agency may consider in the course of the
registration review. The Agency may include information from its files
including, but not limited to, the following information:
     An overview of the registration review case status.
     A list of current product registrations and registrants.
     Federal Register notices regarding any pending
registration actions.
     Federal Register notices regarding current or pending
tolerances.
     Risk assessments.
     Bibliographies concerning current registrations.
     Summaries of incident data.
     Any other pertinent data or information.
     Each docket contains a document summarizing what the Agency
currently knows about the pesticide case and a preliminary work plan
for anticipated

data and assessment needs. Additional documents provide more detailed
information. During this public comment period, the Agency is asking
that interested persons identify any additional information they
believe the Agency should consider during the registration reviews of
these pesticides. The Agency identifies in each docket the areas where
public comment is specifically requested, though comment in any area is
welcome.
    2. Other related information. More information on these cases,
including the active ingredients for each case, may be located in the
registration review schedule on the Agency's website at http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/registration_review/schedule.htm. Information on
the Agency's registration review program and its implementing
regulation may be seen at http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/registration_review.
     3. Information submission requirements. Anyone may submit data or
information in response to this document. To be considered during a
pesticide's registration review, the submitted data or information must
meet the following requirements:
     To ensure that EPA will consider data or information
submitted, interested persons must submit the data or information
during the comment period. The Agency may, at its discretion, consider
data or information submitted at a later date.
     The data or information submitted must be presented in a
legible and useable form. For example, an English translation must
accompany any material that is not in English and a written transcript
must accompany any information submitted as an audiographic or
videographic record. Written material may be submitted in paper or
electronic form.
     Submitters must clearly identify the source of any
submitted data or information.
     Submitters may request the Agency to reconsider data or
information that the Agency rejected in a previous review. However,
submitters must explain why they believe the Agency should reconsider
the data or information in the pesticide's registration review.
     As provided in 40 CFR 155.58, the registration review
docket for each pesticide case will remain publicly accessible through
the duration of the registration review process; that is, until all
actions required in the final decision on the registration review case
have been completed.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Pesticides and pests.

    Dated: June 16, 2009.
 Richard P. Keigwin, Jr.,
Director, Special Review and Registration Division, Office of Pesticide
Programs.

[FR Doc. E9-14735 Filed 6-23-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register: May 31, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 104)]
[Notices]
[Page 30905]
[DOCID:fr31my06-73]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP06-353-001]

Northern Natural Gas Company; Notice of Supplemental Filing

May 24, 2006.
    Take notice that on May 19, 2006, Northern Natural Gas Company
(Northern) tendered for filing the non-conforming service agreement and
the redlined service agreement highlighting the non-conforming
provisions. Northern states that the service agreement was
inadvertently omitted from the May 8, 2006 filing in this docket.
    Northern further states that copies of the filing have been mailed
to each of its customers and interested state commissions.
    Any person desiring to protest this filing must file in accordance
with Rule 211 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18
CFR 385.211). Protests to this filing will be considered by the
Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will
not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Such protests
must be filed on or before the date as indicated below. Anyone filing a
protest must serve a copy of that document on all the parties to the
proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests in lieu
of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons

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

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on May 31, 2006.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-8339 Filed 5-30-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P