[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 218 (Thursday, November 10, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 70178]
[FR Doc No: C1-2011-27900]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 3306; File No.: 801-35969]

Investment Advisers Act of 1940; In the Matter of Creative
Investment Research, Inc., 1050 17th Street NW., Suite 1000,
Washington, DC 20036; Notice of Intention to Cancel Registration
Pursuant to Section 203(h) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940

October 24, 2011.

Correction

    In notice document 2011-27900, appearing on pages 67005-67006 in
the issue of October 28, 2011, make the following correction:
    On page 67005, in the second column, the subject heading should
read as set forth above.

[FR Doc. C1-2011-27900 Filed 11-9-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1505-01-D


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 91 (Monday, May 12, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 26901-26905]
[FR Doc No: 2014-09929]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0766; Directorate Identifier 2013-NE-26-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Pratt & Whitney Canada Corp. Turboprop
Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM); request for
comments.

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

SUMMARY: We are revising an earlier proposed airworthiness directive
(AD) for all Pratt & Whitney Canada Corp. (P&WC) PT6A-114 and PT6A-114A
turboprop engines. The NPRM proposed to require initial and repetitive
borescope inspections (BSIs) of compressor turbine (CT) blades, and the
removal from service of blades that fail inspection. The NPRM was
prompted by several incidents of CT blade failure, causing power loss
and in-flight shutdown of the engine resulting in four fatalities. This
action revises the NPRM by adding a mandatory terminating action. We
are proposing this supplemental NPRM (SNPRM) to prevent failure of CT
blades, which could lead to damage to the engine and damage to the
airplane. Since these actions impose an additional burden over that
proposed in the NPRM, we are reopening the comment period to allow the
public the chance to comment on this proposed change.

DATES: We must receive comments on this SNPRM by June 26, 2014.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, 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 W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Pratt & Whitney Canada Corp., 1000 Marie-Victorin, Longueuil, Quebec,
Canada, J4G 1A1; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet:
www.pwc.ca. You may view this service information at the FAA, Engine &
Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA.
For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
781-238-7125.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2013-
0766; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this proposed AD, the Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA)
AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other

information. The address for the Docket Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is
in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket
shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Morlath, Aerospace Engineer,
Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12
New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
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-2013-0766;
Directorate Identifier 2013-NE-26-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 because of 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

    We issued an NPRM to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that
would apply to all P&WC PT6A-114 and PT6A-114A turboprop engines. The
NPRM published in the Federal Register on October 29, 2013 (78 FR
64421). The NPRM proposed to require initial and repetitive BSIs of CT
blades, and the removal from service of blades that fail inspection.

Actions Since Previous NPRM Was Issued

    Since we issued the NPRM, we received additional information as a
result of comment responses and as part of an ongoing investigation.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We considered the comments received.

Agreement With the Proposed AD

    The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) and Hawkins Aero
agreed with the need for the AD action.

Request To Harmonize

    TCCA requested that the Compliance section of this AD be revised to
mandate that operators replace pre-P&WC Service Bulletin (SB) No. PT6A-
72-1669 CT blades with single crystal CT blades within the next 36
months. TCCA's AD CF 2013-21R1 mandates that operators replace all CT
blades with new part number (P/N) single crystal CT blades within 36
months after the effective date of the AD to address the unsafe
condition of CT blade failures due to creep. The NPRM does not mandate
that new P/N single crystal CT blades be installed within a particular
period of time. TCCA requested that we revise the FAA AD to better
address the unsafe condition.
    We agree. We changed the Compliance paragraph to require that all
CT blades be replaced with single crystal CT blades within 36 months
after the effective date of this AD.

Request To Remove Mandatory Upgrade

    Hawkins Aero and an individual commenter requested that the AD not
require operators to upgrade to single crystal CT blades. Hawkins Aero
stated that based on knowledge of previously conducted metallurgical
examinations, certain operators experience higher levels of CT blade
deterioration based on operating practices. The other commenter stated
that low utilization operators may face a heavy economic burden in
order to upgrade to the new single crystal CT blades.
    We partially agree. We disagree with allowing certain operators to
not upgrade to single crystal CT blades because CT blade failure due to
creep is a significant problem for this type design, and the unsafe
condition identified in this AD must be corrected. We did not change
the requirement to replace the CT blades. We agree that mandating the
installation of single crystal CT blades will impose a significant
economic burden on low utilization operators. As such, we are re-
opening the comment period for this AD to allow the public the chance
to comment on the proposed changes. The additional economic costs for
low utilization operators are included in the Costs of Compliance.

Request To Change Borescope Inspection Requirements

    The same individual commenter requested a review and modification
of the compliance time for the initial and repetitive BSIs for low-
utilization operators. The commenter justified this request by stating
that, ``Since the vast majority of the 114A fleet is utilized in the
relatively high utilization environment of commercial operation, based
on an assumption of 500 hours annual utilization, the repetitive BSIs
would be done on an annual basis''.
    We do not agree. The creep condition addressed by this proposed AD
is related to time in operation at high temperature and high power
settings, not calendar time. We did not change the compliance time.

Request To Change Definitions Paragraph

    Hawkins Aero requested that we revise the Definitions paragraph to
include specific original equipment manufacturer and parts manufacturer
approval (PMA) P/Ns. The justification for this request is that the
proposed AD does not specifically identify pre- and post-SB No. PT6A-
72-1669 P/Ns and does not list PMA P/Ns.
    We partially agree. We agree that P/N identification is necessary.
We identified what P/Ns can be installed during the compliance period
and what P/Ns must be installed prior to the end of the 36-month
compliance period. We disagree with listing all potential original
equipment manufacturer and PMA P/Ns. We deleted the Definitions
paragraph and expanded the Compliance paragraph to identify eligible P/
Ns.

Request To Include Two-Blade Metallurgical Examination

    TCCA and Hawkins Aero requested that the Compliance paragraph be
changed to require operators to perform a two-blade metallurgical
examination at each hot section interval (HSI). The reason for this
request is that the P&WC maintenance manual recommends, and the TCCA AD
currently requires, that operators perform a metallurgical evaluation
of two CT blades at each HSI in lieu of replacing the entire set. Based
on the deterioration of the micro-structure observed in the two blade
sample, a determination is made as to whether the remaining CT blades
can continue in service. TCCA also requested that we revise the
Applicability paragraph of the AD to clearly state that the CT blades
be replaced or undergo metallurgical evaluation, repetitively, at each
HSI. TCCA stated that the NPRM did not clearly state whether the
evaluation was a one-time or a repetitive requirement and that without
requiring the evaluation be made at each HSI our AD does not meet the
basic intent of their AD, which was to detect the impending failure of
the CT blades as a result of creep on all engines moving forward.

    We partially agree. We agree with allowing operators to perform the
metallurgical examination instead of replacing the entire set of CT
blades at each HSI because the metallurgical evaluation is an approved
method for determining if installed CT blades support continued safe
operation. We also agree with repetitive replacement of CT blades at
each HSI.
    We do not agree with requiring operators to perform the
metallurgical examination at each HSI because new CT blades can be
installed. We have determined that either performing the metallurgical
examination or installing new CT blades will provide an acceptable
level of safety. We changed the Compliance paragraphs to allow
operators to perform the metallurgical examination or replace the
entire set of CT blades with new blades at each HSI.

Request Harmonization of Compliance Times

    The NTSB requested that the difference in compliance time for the
BSI between the NPRM (78 FR 64421, October 29, 2013), the TCCA AD, and
the P&WC SB be explained in further detail. The NTSB stated that P&WC
SB No. PT6A-72-1669, Revision 9, dated June 28, 2013, includes a re-
inspection interval for the repetitive BSIs of 400 hours time-in-
service (TIS) while the NPRM and the TCCA AD specify 500 hours TIS.
    We do not agree. The 500 hour TIS inspection interval addresses the
unsafe condition by providing an acceptable level of safety. We did not
change the AD.

Request To Add Repetitive Inspections

    Hawkins Aero requested that the compliance paragraph of the
proposed AD be revised to include repetitive BSIs and HSI metallurgical
inspections for single crystal CT blades. The reason for this request
is that the commenter does not believe that the repetitive inspections
should be relaxed for the single crystal CT blades until more data can
be gathered about their performance. Reference was made to an engine
failure that occurred on an engine with single crystal CT blades as
evidence that while the design is an improvement on previous blade
versions they are not immune to failure.
    We do not agree with mandating that the new CT blades be subjected
to an inspection program designed for a different blade design and P/N.
The investigation into single crystal CT blade failures has not been
completed and therefore, the need for additional corrective action has
not been determined. We did not change the AD.

Request To Add Additional Inspection

    Hawkins Aero requested that the Compliance paragraph be changed to
include platform gap inspections as well as installation instructions
to ensure the proper platform gap is achieved during HSI for P&WC
single crystal CT blades, P/N 3072791-01. This change was justified
because single crystal CT blades, P/N 3072791-01 and P/N 3072791-02,
have different blade platform gap tolerances. The P/N 3072791-01
tolerances may lead to a smaller gap between blade platforms than on
the P/N 3072791-02 blades leading to a potential failure of the CT
blade.
    We do not agree. There have been no unsafe conditions identified
concerning the platform gap dimensions that would warrant this change.
We did not change the AD.

Request Revision to Economic Evaluation

    Hawkins Aero requested that the economic evaluation section of the
AD include foreign-registered products and corresponding revisions to
the compliance section. This request was justified because accounting
for foreign-registered products would increase the projected cost for
the AD; additionally, the commenter recommends that we revise the
compliance paragraph and include the additional costs for all
additional actions.
    We partially agree. We agree with revising the Costs of Compliance
to include any changes that are made to the compliance paragraph. We
disagree with including foreign-registered products in the Costs of
Compliance because we do not consider the cost of AD actions for
foreign-registered products. We changed the AD to account for
Compliance paragraph changes in the Costs of Compliance.

Request Addition of Cockpit Placard

    Hawkins Aero requested that the Compliance paragraph of the
proposed AD be revised to include the installation of a placard in the
cockpit alerting the pilot to various operational limits and re-
iterating warnings from the engine and aircraft Instructions for
Continued Airworthiness (ICAs). The reason given for this request is
that the current guidance for pilots and maintenance personnel is not
sufficient to prevent the aircraft from being operated beyond its
published limits. Additionally, there are certain procedures that the
pilots, operators, and maintenance personnel can perform to ensure
continued safe operation.
    We do not agree. Including instructions for aircraft operation does
not fall within the guidelines of the AD action. We discussed this
comment with the appropriate aircraft certification office.

Request Revision to Optional Terminating Action

    Hawkins Aero requested that the Optional Terminating Action
paragraph be revised to include guidance for operators on whether or
not to install single crystal CT blades, based on operational history
and the cost of parts. This request is justified based on historical
differences between the CT blade deterioration experienced by certain
operators and the costs of the new CT blades.
    We do not agree. Providing guidance to operators based on blade
deterioration vs. cost of replacement is contrary to the intent of
addressing the unsafe condition. We did not change the AD.

Request Revision to Compliance

    Hawkins Aero requested that the Compliance paragraph be revised to
state that cracked, stretched, sulfidated, or abnormal blades should be
removed from service. A justification for this request was not
provided.
    We do not agree. The engine ICA provide data for serviceable limits
for all engine components. We did not change the AD.

Request Revision to Compliance

    Hawkins Aero requested that the Compliance paragraph be revised to
provide a recommendation that the repetitive BSIs be scheduled to
coincide with pre-existing fuel nozzle inspections and to state the
maximum allowable HSI. The reason for this request is that fuel nozzle
inspection intervals match mandated BSI intervals. The HSI
recommendation is 1,800 hours.
    We do not agree. The HSI recommendations are stated in the ICA and
providing guidance on scheduling of maintenance actions does not
support an AD action intended to address an unsafe condition in an
aircraft, aircraft engine, propeller, etc. We did not change the AD.

Request Revision to Compliance

    Hawkins Aero requested that the Compliance paragraph be revised to
include CT disk and blade inspection intervals and requirements from
the overhaul manual. The reason for this change is to provide
background information for operators.
    We do not agree. Restating requirements that are available to

operators is redundant. We did not change the AD.

FAA's Determination

    We are proposing this SNPRM because we evaluated all the relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.
Certain changes described above expand the scope of the NPRM (78 FR
64421, October 29, 2013). As a result, we have determined that it is
necessary to reopen the comment period to provide additional
opportunity for the public to comment on this SNPRM.

Proposed Requirements of This SNPRM

    This SNPRM would require accomplishing the actions specified in the
NPRM, except as discussed under ``Differences Between this SNPRM and
the Service Information.''

Differences Between This SNPRM and the Service Information

    The service information requires that all operators perform
metallurgical examinations of the CT blades at HSI while the proposed
AD allows for either removal of the CT blades from service at HSI or
performance of the metallurgical examination.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD would affect about 300 engines
installed on airplanes of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it would
take about 4 hours per engine to perform the required inspection and 8
hours to perform parts replacement. The average labor rate is $85 per
hour. Required parts would cost about $59,334 per engine. Based on
these figures, we estimate the cost of this proposed AD on U.S.
operators to be $18,106,200.

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),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaskato the extent that
it justifies making a regulatory distinction, and
    (4) 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.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, 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

0
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]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

Pratt & Whitney Canada Corp.: Docket No. FAA-2013-0766; Directorate
Identifier 2013-NE-26-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by June 26, 2014.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Pratt & Whitney Canada Corp. (P&WC) PT6A-
114 and PT6A-114A turboprop engines.

(d) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by several incidents of compressor turbine
(CT) blade failure, causing power loss and in-flight shutdown of the
engine resulting in four fatalities. We are issuing this AD to
prevent failure of CT blades, which could lead to damage to the
engine and damage to the airplane.

(e) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.
    (1) For engines that have CT blades installed other than CT
blades, part numbers (P/Ns) 3072791-01 or 3072791-02, perform the
following actions:
    (i) Within 150 operating hours after the effective date of this
AD, perform a borescope inspection (BSI) of CT blades for engines
with 500 or more hours time-since-new that have not been previously
inspected or time-since-last-inspection (TSLI).
    (ii) Thereafter, repeat the inspection in paragraph (e)(1)(i) of
this AD within 500 flight hours TSLI.
    (iii) During the next hot section inspection (HSI) after the
effective date of this AD, and each HSI thereafter, replace the
complete set of CT blades with any of the following:
    (A) New CT blades;
    (B) CT blades that have passed a two-blade metallurgical
examination in accordance with paragraph 3.B. of P&WC Service
Bulletin (SB) No. PT6A-72-1669, Revision 9, dated June 28, 2013; or
    (C) P&WC single crystal CT blades, P/Ns 3072791-01 or 3072791-
02.
    (2) Reserved.

(f) Mandatory Terminating Action

    Within 36 months after the effective date of this AD, replace
the complete set of CT blades with single crystal CT blades, P/Ns
3072791-01 or 3072791-02.

(g) Credit for Previous Action

    If you performed P&WC SB No. PT6A-72-1669, Revision 9, dated
June 28, 2013, or earlier versions, you have met the initial
inspection requirements of this AD. However, you must still comply
with the repetitive inspection requirement of paragraph (e)(1)(ii)
of this AD.

(h) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    The Manager, Engine Certification Office, FAA, may approve AMOCs
to this AD. Use the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19 to make your
request.

(i) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Robert Morlath,
Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine &
Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA
01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Refer to Transport Canada Civil Aviation AD CF-2013-21R1,
dated October 31, 2013, for more information. You may examine AD CF-
2013-21R1 in the AD docket on the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov/!documentDetail;D=FAA-2013-0766-0002.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Pratt
& Whitney Canada Corp., 1000 Marie-Victorin, Longueuil, Quebec,
Canada, J4G 1A1; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet:
www.pwc.ca.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Engine &
Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington,
MA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on April 18, 2014.
Colleen M. D'Alessandro,
Assistant Directorate Manager, Engine & Propeller Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-09929 Filed 5-9-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 157 (Wednesday, August 18, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46287-46290]
[FR Doc No: 2021-17669]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-92650; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2021-29]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
of Amendment No. 1 and Order Instituting Proceedings To Determine
Whether To Approve or Disapprove a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by
Amendment No. 1, To List and Trade Shares of ConvexityShares 1x SPIKES
Futures ETF Under NYSE Arca Rule 8.200-E (Trust Issued Receipts)

August 12, 2021.

I. Introduction

    On May 13, 2021, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''),
pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'' or ``Exchange Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change to list and trade shares (``Shares'') of the
ConvexityShares 1x SPIKES Futures ETF (``Fund''), a series of the
ConvexityShares Trust (``Trust''), under NYSE Arca Rule 8.200-E,
Commentary .02 (``Trust Issued Receipts''). The proposed rule change
was published for comment in the Federal Register on May 26, 2021.\3\
On July 2, 2021, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\4\ the
Commission designated a longer period within which to approve the
proposed rule change, disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute
proceedings to determine whether to approve or disapprove the proposed
rule change.\5\ On July 26, 2021, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to
the proposed rule change, which replaced and superseded the proposed
rule change as originally filed.\6\ The

Commission has received no comments on the proposed rule change. The
Commission is publishing this notice and order to solicit comments on
Amendment No. 1 from interested persons, and to institute proceedings
pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act \7\ to determine whether to
approve or disapprove the proposed rule change, as modified by
Amendment No. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 91952 (May 20,
2021), 86 FR 28410.
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 92321, 86 FR 36173
(July 8, 2021). The Commission designated August 24, 2021, as the
date by which the Commission shall approve or disapprove, or
institute proceedings to determine whether to approve or disapprove,
the proposed rule change.
    \6\ In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange: (i) Stated that Teucrium
Trading, LLC will be the Sub-Adviser for the Fund; (ii) represented
that neither the Sponsor nor the Sub-Adviser (as such terms are
defined below) is registered as a broker-dealer or affiliated with a
broker-dealer and made additional representations with respect to
firewalls; (iii) stated that the Fund will seek investment results,
before fees and expenses, that correspond to the performance of the
Index (as defined below) and that the Fund will seek to track the
Index over time, not just for a single day; (iv) stated that the
Sponsor or Sub-Adviser determines the type, quantity and mix of
investments that the Sponsor or Sub-Adviser believes, in
combination, should provide exposure to the Index to seek investment
results equal to the performance of the Index; (v) stated that the
Sponsor or Sub-Adviser may cause the Fund to invest in VIX Related
Positions (as defined below) if the market for a specific futures
contract experiences emergencies or disruptions or in situations
where the Sponsor or Sub-Adviser deems it impractical or inadvisable
to buy or sell SPIKES futures contracts; (vi) represented that (a)
the Fund will attempt to limit counterparty risk in uncleared swap
agreements by entering into such agreements only with counterparties
the Sponsor and Sub-Adviser believes are creditworthy and by
limiting the Fund's exposure to each counterparty and (b) the
Sponsor and Sub-Adviser will monitor the creditworthiness of each
counterparty and the Fund's exposure to each counterparty on an
ongoing basis; (vii) stated that, with respect to halting trading in
the Shares, the Exchange may consider (a) the extent to which
trading is not occurring in the securities and/or the financial
instruments composing the daily disclosed portfolio of the Fund; or
(b) whether other unusual conditions or circumstances detrimental to
the maintenance of a fair and orderly market are present; (viii)
represented that information regarding market price and trading
volume for the Shares will be continually available on a real-time
basis throughout the day on brokers' computer screens and other
electronic services; (ix) represented that prior to the commencement
of trading, the Exchange will inform its Equity Trading Permit
Holders in an Information Bulletin of, among other things, the
special characteristics and risks associated with trading the
Shares, the prospectus delivery requirements applicable to the Fund,
and any exemptive, no-action, and interpretive relief granted by the
Commission from any rules under the Act; and (x) made technical,
clarifying, and conforming changes. Amendment No. 1 is available at:
https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-nysearca-2021-29/srnysearca202129.htm.
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment
No. 1 \8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Additional information regarding the Fund, the Trust, and
the Shares, including investment strategies, creation and redemption
procedures, and portfolio holdings can be found in Amendment No. 1,
supra note 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to list and trade Shares of the Fund \9\
under NYSE Arca Rule 8.200-E, Commentary .02 which governs the listing
and trading of Trust Issued Receipts \10\ on the Exchange. The Fund
will be managed and controlled by ConvexityShares, LLC (``Sponsor''), a
commodity pool operator.\11\ Teucrium Trading, LLC, a commodity trading
adviser registered with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, will
be the Sub-Adviser for the Fund (``Sub-Adviser'') and will manage the
Fund's commodity futures investment strategy.\12\ U.S. Bank will
provide custody and fund accounting to the Trust and the Fund; U.S.
Bancorp Fund Services will be the transfer agent for the Shares and
administrator for the Fund; and Foreside will serve as the distributor
for the Fund.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ On December 15, 2020, the Trust submitted to the Commission
its draft registration statement on Form S-1 (``Registration
Statement'') under the Securities Act of 1933 on a confidential
basis. The Registration Statement for the Fund is not yet effective
and the Exchange will not commence trading in Shares of the Fund
until the Registration Statement becomes effective.
    \10\ Commentary .02 to NYSE Arca Rule 8.200-E applies to Trust
Issued Receipts that invest in ``Financial Instruments.'' The term
``Financial Instruments,'' as defined in Commentary .02(b)(4) to
NYSE Arca Rule 8.200-E, means any combination of investments,
including cash; securities; options on securities and indices;
futures contracts; options on futures contracts; forward contracts;
equity caps, collars, and floors; and swap agreements.
    \11\ The Sponsor is not registered as a broker-dealer or
affiliated with a broker-dealer. In the event (a) the Sponsor
becomes registered as a broker-dealer or becomes newly affiliated
with a broker-dealer, or (b) any new sponsor becomes registered as a
broker-dealer or becomes newly affiliated with a broker-dealer, it
will implement and maintain a fire wall with respect to its relevant
personnel of the broker-dealer or broker-dealer affiliate, as
applicable, regarding access to information concerning the
composition and/or changes to the portfolio, and will be subject to
procedures designed to prevent the use and dissemination of material
non-public information regarding the portfolio.
    \12\ The Sub-Adviser is not registered as a broker-dealer or
affiliated with a broker-dealer. In the event (a) the Sub-Adviser
becomes registered as a broker-dealer or becomes newly affiliated
with a broker-dealer, or (b) any new Sub-Adviser becomes registered
as a broker-dealer or becomes newly affiliated with a broker-dealer,
it will implement and maintain a fire wall with respect to its
relevant personnel of the broker-dealer or broker-dealer affiliate,
as applicable, regarding access to information concerning the
composition and/or changes to the portfolio, and will be subject to
procedures designed to prevent the use and dissemination of material
non-public information regarding the portfolio.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Fund will seek investment results, before fees and expenses,
that correspond to the performance of its benchmark index. The Fund
will seek to track the Index over time, not just for a single day. The
Fund is benchmarked to the T3 SPIKE Front 2 Futures Index (``Index''),
an investable index of SPIKES futures contracts.\13\ The Index is
intended to reflect the returns that are potentially available through
an unleveraged investment in a theoretical portfolio of first- and
second-month futures contracts on the SPIKES Volatility Index (``SPIKES
Index'').\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ The Index is sponsored by Triple Three Partners Pty Ltd,
which licenses the use of the Index to its affiliated company, T3i
Pty Ltd (Triple Three Partners Pty Ltd and T3i Pty Ltd. are
collectively referred to herein as ``T3 Index'' or ``Index
Sponsor''). The Index Sponsor is affiliated with the Sponsor. The
Index Sponsor has implemented and will maintain a fire wall
regarding access to information concerning the composition of and/or
changes to the Index. In addition, the Index Sponsor has implemented
and will maintain procedures that are designed to prevent the use
and dissemination of material, non-public information regarding the
Index. The Index Sponsor is not registered as an investment adviser
or broker-dealer and is not affiliated with any broker-dealers. The
Index is calculated and published by Solactive AG, which is not
affiliated with T3 Index.
    \14\ The Exchange states that the SPIKES Index is a non-
investable index that measures the implied volatility of the SPDR
S&P 500 ETF Trust (``SPY'') over 30 days in the future. SPY is a
unit investment trust that holds a portfolio of common stocks that
closely tracks the price performance and dividend yield of the S&P
500 Composite Price Index (``S&P 500''). The SPIKES Index does not
represent the actual or the realized volatility of SPY. The SPIKES
Index is calculated based on the prices of a constantly changing
portfolio of SPY put and call options. The SPIKES Index is
reflective of the premium paid by investors for certain options
linked to the level of the S&P 500. The SPIKES Index is a
theoretical calculation and cannot be traded on a spot basis. T3
Index is the owner, creator and licensor of the SPIKES Index. The
SPIKES Index is calculated, maintained and published by Miami
International Securities Exchange, LLC via the Options Price
Reporting Authority.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Index is comprised solely of SPIKES futures contracts.\15\ The
Index employs rules for selecting the SPIKES futures contracts
comprising the Index and a formula to calculate a level for the Index
from the prices of these SPIKES futures contracts. Currently, the
SPIKES futures contracts comprising the Index represent the prices of
two near-term SPIKES futures contracts, replicating a position that
rolls the nearest month SPIKES futures contracts to the next month
SPIKES futures contracts at or close to the daily settlement price via
a Trade-At-Settlement \16\ program towards the end of each business day
in equal fractional amounts. This results in a constant weighted
average maturity of one month.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ According to the Exchange, SPIKES futures contracts were
launched for trading by the Minneapolis Grain Exchange, LLC
(``MGEX'') on December 14, 2020. While the SPIKES Index represents a
measure of the expected 30-day volatility of SPY, the prices of
SPIKES futures contracts are based on the current expectation of the
expected 30-day volatility of SPY on the expiration date of the
futures contract.
    \16\ According to the Exchange, a Trade at Settlement (``TAS'')
transaction is a transaction at a price equal to the daily
settlement price, or at a specified differential above or below the
daily settlement price. The TAS transaction price will be determined
following execution and based upon the daily settlement price of the
respective SPIKES futures contracts month. The permissible price
range for permitted TAS transactions is from 0.50 index points below
the daily settlement price to 0.50 index points above the daily
settlement price. The permissible minimum increment for a TAS
transaction is 0.01 index points. See MGEX Rule 83.15 at http://www.mgex.com/documents/20210318-Rulebook.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Fund will invest primarily in SPIKES futures contracts to gain
the appropriate exposure to the Index. Under certain circumstances
(described below), the Fund may also invest in futures contracts and
swap contracts (``VIX Related Positions'') on the Cboe Volatility Index
(``VIX'').\17\ The Exchange states that the VIX is an index that tracks
volatility and would be expected to perform in a substantially similar
manner as the SPIKES Index.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ According to the Exchange, the VIX is a measure of
estimated near-term future volatility based upon the weighted
average of the implied volatilities of near-term put and call
options on the S&P 500.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Fund seeks to achieve its investment objective through the
appropriate amount of exposure to the SPIKES futures contracts included
in the Index. The Fund will not directly invest in the SPIKES Index.
The Sponsor or Sub-Adviser determines the

type, quantity and mix of investments that the Sponsor or Sub-Adviser
believes, in combination, should provide exposure to the Index to seek
investment results equal to the performance of the Index. In the event
accountability rules, price limits, position limits, margin limits or
other exposure limits are reached with respect to SPIKES futures
contracts, or if the market for a specific futures contract experiences
emergencies (e.g., natural disaster, terrorist attack or an act of God)
or disruptions (e.g., a trading halt or a flash crash), or in
situations where the Sponsor or Sub-Adviser deems it impractical or
inadvisable to buy or sell SPIKES futures contracts (such as during
periods of market volatility or illiquidity, or when trading in SPY is
halted), the Sponsor or Sub-Adviser may cause the Fund to invest in VIX
Related Positions. The Sponsor expects the Fund's positions in VIX
Related Positions to consist primarily of VIX futures contracts, which
are traded on the Cboe Futures Exchange. However, in the event
accountability rules, price limits, position limits, margin limits or
other exposure limits are reached with respect to VIX futures
contracts, or if the market for a specific VIX futures contract
experiences emergencies or disruptions or in situations where the
Sponsor or Sub-Adviser deems it impractical or inadvisable to buy or
sell VIX futures contracts, the Fund would hold VIX swap
agreements.\18\ The Fund will also hold cash or cash equivalents such
as U.S. Treasury securities or other high credit quality, short-term
fixed-income or similar securities (such as shares of money market
funds) as collateral for investments and pending investments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ The Fund will attempt to limit counterparty risk in
uncleared swap agreements by entering into such agreements only with
counterparties the Sponsor and Sub-Adviser believes are creditworthy
and by limiting the Fund's exposure to each counterparty. The
Exchange represents that the Sponsor and Sub-Adviser will monitor
the creditworthiness of each counterparty and the Fund's exposure to
each counterparty on an ongoing basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove SR-
NYSEArca-2021-29, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, and Grounds for
Disapproval Under Consideration

    The Commission is instituting proceedings pursuant to Section
19(b)(2)(B) of the Act \19\ to determine whether the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, should be approved or
disapproved. Institution of such proceedings is appropriate at this
time in view of the legal and policy issues raised by the proposal.
Institution of proceedings does not indicate that the Commission has
reached any conclusions with respect to any of the issues involved.
Rather, as described below, the Commission seeks and encourages
interested persons to provide comments on the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act,\20\ the Commission is
providing notice of the grounds for disapproval under consideration.
The Commission is instituting proceedings to allow for additional
analysis of the proposal's consistency with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,
which requires, among other things, that the rules of a national
securities exchange be ``designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade,'' and ``to protect investors and the public
interest.'' \21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ Id.
    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the Commission's Rules of Practice, the ``burden to
demonstrate that a proposed rule change is consistent with the Exchange
Act and the rules and regulations issued thereunder . . . is on the
[SRO] that proposed the rule change.'' \22\ The description of a
proposed rule change, its purpose and operation, its effect, and a
legal analysis of its consistency with applicable requirements must all
be sufficiently detailed and specific to support an affirmative
Commission finding,\23\ and any failure of an SRO to provide this
information may result in the Commission not having a sufficient basis
to make an affirmative finding that a proposed rule change is
consistent with the Act and the applicable rules and regulations.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 17 CFR 201.700(b)(3).
    \23\ See id.
    \24\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission is instituting proceedings to allow for additional
consideration and comment on the issues raised herein, including as to
whether the proposal is consistent with the Act.

IV. Procedure: Request for Written Comments

    The Commission requests that interested persons provide written
submissions of their views, data, and arguments with respect to the
issues identified above, as well as any other concerns they may have
with the proposal. In particular, the Commission invites the written
views of interested persons concerning whether the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, is consistent with Section
6(b)(5) or any other provision of the Act, or the rules and regulations
thereunder. Although there do not appear to be any issues relevant to
approval or disapproval that would be facilitated by an oral
presentation of views, data, and arguments, the Commission will
consider, pursuant to Rule 19b-4, any request for an opportunity to
make an oral presentation.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, as amended by the Securities
Act Amendments of 1975, Public Law 94-29 (June 4, 1975), grants the
Commission flexibility to determine what type of proceeding--either
oral or notice and opportunity for written comments--is appropriate
for consideration of a particular proposal by a self-regulatory
organization. See Securities Act Amendments of 1975, Senate Comm. on
Banking, Housing & Urban Affairs, S. Rep. No. 75, 94th Cong., 1st
Sess. 30 (1975).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments regarding whether the proposed rule change, as modified by
Amendment No. 1, should be approved or disapproved by September 8,
2021. Any person who wishes to file a rebuttal to any other person's
submission must file that rebuttal by September 22, 2021.
    The Commission asks that commenters address the sufficiency of the
Exchange's statements in support of the proposal, which are set forth
in the Amendment No. 1, in addition to any other comments they may wish
to submit about the proposed rule change. In this regard, the
Commission seeks commenters' views regarding whether the Exchange's
proposal to list and trade the Shares, which seek to provide investment
results that correspond to the return of an index designed to measure
the daily performance of a theoretical portfolio of first- and second-
month SPIKES futures contracts, is adequately designed to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, and to protect investors and the public
interest, consistent with the Act.
    Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSEArca-2021-29 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2021-29. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2021-29 and should be submitted
by September 8, 2021. Rebuttal comments should be submitted by
September 22, 2021.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(57).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-17669 Filed 8-17-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 213 (Friday, November 2, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55156-55157]
[FR Doc No: 2018-23998]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP16-116-000]

Texas LNG Brownsville, LLC; Notice of Availability of the Draft
Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Texas LNG Project

    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or
Commission) has prepared a draft environmental impact statement (EIS)
for the Texas LNG Project, proposed by Texas LNG Brownsville, LLC
(Texas LNG) in the above-referenced docket. Texas LNG requests
authorization to site, construct, modify, and operate liquefied natural
gas (LNG) export facilities on the Brownsville Ship Channel in Cameron
County, Texas. The Texas LNG Project would include a new LNG export
terminal capable of producing up to 4 million tonnes per annum of LNG
for export. The terminal would receive natural gas to the export
facilities from a third-party intrastate pipeline.
    The draft EIS assesses the potential environmental effects of the
construction and operation of the Texas LNG Project in accordance with
the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The
FERC staff concludes that approval of the Texas LNG Project would
result in adverse environmental impacts. However, with the mitigation
measures recommended in the EIS, impacts in the project area would be
avoided or minimized and would not be significant, with the exception
of visual resources when viewed from the Laguna Atascosa National
Wildlife Refuge. In addition, the Texas LNG Project, combined with
other projects in the geographic scope, including the Rio Grande LNG
and Annova LNG Projects, would result in significant cumulative impacts
from sediment/turbidity and shoreline erosions within the Brownsville
Ship Channel during operations from vessel transits; on the federally
listed ocelot and jaguarundi from habitat loss and potential for
increased vehicular strikes during construction; and on visual
resources from the presence of aboveground structures. Construction and
operation of the Texas LNG Project would result in mostly temporary or
short-term environmental impacts; however, some long-term and permanent
environmental impacts would occur.
    The U.S. Department of Energy, U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, U.S. Department of Transportation's Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration and Federal Aviation Administration,
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
National Park Service, and National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration's National Marine Fisheries Service participated as
cooperating agencies in the preparation of the EIS. Cooperating
agencies have jurisdiction by law or special expertise with respect to
resources potentially affected by the proposal and participate in the
NEPA analysis. Although the cooperating agencies provided input to the
conclusions and recommendations presented in the draft EIS, the
agencies will present their own conclusions and recommendations in
their respective Records of Decision for the project.
    The draft EIS addresses the potential environmental effects of the
construction and operation of the following project facilities:

 Gas gate station and interconnect facility;
 pretreatment facility for carbon dioxide removal and
dehydration;
 turbo-expander for pentane plus heavy carbon removal;
 a Liquefaction Plant consisting of two liquefaction trains and
ancillary support facilities;
 two approximately 210,000 m\3\ aboveground full containment
LNG storage tanks with cryogenic pipeline connections to the
Liquefaction Plant and berthing dock;
 an LNG carrier berthing dock capable of receiving LNG carriers
between approximately 130,000 m\3\ and 180,000 m\3\ in capacity;
 a permanent material offloading facility to allow waterborne
deliveries of equipment and materials during construction and mooring
of tug boats while an LNG carrier is at the berth;
 thermal oxidizer, warm wet flare, cold dry flare, spare flare,
acid gas flare, and marine flare; and
 administration, control, maintenance, and warehouse buildings
and related parking lots; electrical transmission line and substation,
water pipeline, septic system, natural gas pipeline, and stormwater
facilities/outfalls.

    The Commission mailed a copy of the Notice of Availability to
federal, state, and local government representatives and agencies;
elected officials; environmental and public interest groups; Native
American tribes; potentially affected landowners and other interested
individuals and groups; and newspapers and libraries in the project
area. The draft EIS is only available in electronic format. It may be
viewed and downloaded from the FERC's website (www.ferc.gov), on the
Environmental Documents page (https://www.ferc.gov/industries/gas/enviro/eis.asp). In addition, the draft EIS may be accessed by using
the eLibrary link on the FERC's website. Click on the eLibrary link
(https://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp), click on General
Search, and enter the docket number in the Docket Number field,
excluding the last three digits (i.e., CP16-116). Be sure you have
selected an appropriate date range. For assistance, please contact FERC
Online Support at [email protected] or toll free at (866) 208-
3676, or for TTY, contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any person wishing to comment on the draft EIS may do so. Your
comments should focus on draft EIS's disclosure and discussion of
potential environmental effects, reasonable alternatives, and measures
to avoid or lessen environmental impacts. To

ensure consideration of your comments on the proposal in the final EIS,
it is important that the Commission receive your comments on or before
5:00pm Eastern Time on December 17, 2018.
    For your convenience, there are four methods you can use to submit
your comments to the Commission. The Commission will provide equal
consideration to all comments received, whether filed in written form
or provided verbally. The Commission encourages electronic filing of
comments and has staff available to assist you at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
[email protected]. Please carefully follow these instructions
so that your comments are properly recorded.
    (1) You can file your comments electronically using the eComment
feature on the Commission's website (www.ferc.gov) under the link to
Documents and Filings. This is an easy method for submitting brief,
text-only comments on a project;
    (2) You can file your comments electronically by using the eFiling
feature on the Commission's website (www.ferc.gov) under the link to
Documents and Filings. With eFiling, you can provide comments in a
variety of formats by attaching them as a file with your submission.
New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking on
eRegister. If you are filing a comment on a particular project, please
select ``Comment on a Filing'' as the filing type; or
    (3) You can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to
the following address. Be sure to reference the project docket number
(CP16-116-000) with your submission: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Room 1A,
Washington, DC 20426
    (4) In lieu of sending written or electronic comments, the
Commission invites you to attend the public comment session its staff
will conduct in the project area to receive comments on the draft EIS,
scheduled as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Date and time                          Location
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thursday, November 15, 2018; 5:00--9:00     Port Isabel Convention
 p.m. local time.                            Center, 309 E. Railroad
                                             Ave, Port Isabel, TX 78578,
<PHONE_NUMBER>.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The primary goal of this comment session is to have you identify
the specific environmental issues and concerns with the draft EIS.
Individual verbal comments will be taken on a one-on-one basis with a
court reporter. This format is designed to receive the maximum amount
of verbal comments, in a convenient way during the timeframe allotted.
    The scoping session is scheduled from 5:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. local
time. You may arrive at any time after 5:00 p.m. There will not be a
formal presentation by Commission staff when the session opens. If you
wish to speak, the Commission staff will hand out numbers in the order
of your arrival. Comments will be taken until the closing hour for the
comment session. However, if no additional numbers have been handed out
and all individuals who wish to provide comments have had an
opportunity to do so, staff may conclude the session 30 minutes before
the closing hour.\1\ Your verbal comments will be recorded by the court
reporter (with FERC staff or representative present) and become part of
the public record for this proceeding. Transcripts will be publicly
available on FERC's eLibrary system (see below for instructions on
using eLibrary). If a significant number of people are interested in
providing verbal comments in the one-on-one settings, a time limit of 5
minutes may be implemented for each commenter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The appendices referenced in this notice will not appear in
the Federal Register. Copies of the appendices were sent to all
those receiving this notice in the mail and are available at
www.ferc.gov using the link called ``eLibrary'' or from the
Commission's Public Reference Room, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426, or call<PHONE_NUMBER>. For instructions on connecting to
eLibrary, refer to the last page of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is important to note that verbal comments hold the same weight
as written or electronically submitted comments. Although there will
not be a formal presentation, Commission staff will be available
throughout the comment session to answer your questions about the
environmental review process.
    Any person seeking to become a party to the proceeding must file a
motion to intervene pursuant to Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedures (18 CFR part 385.214). Motions to intervene are
more fully described at http://www.ferc.gov/resources/guides/how-to/intervene.asp. Only intervenors have the right to seek rehearing or
judicial review of the Commission's decision. The Commission grants
affected landowners and others with environmental concerns intervenor
status upon showing good cause by stating that they have a clear and
direct interest in this proceeding which no other party can adequately
represent. Simply filing environmental comments will not give you
intervenor status, but you do not need intervenor status to have your
comments considered.

Questions?

    Additional information about the project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC, or on the
FERC website (www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary link. The eLibrary link
also provides access to the texts of all formal documents issued by the
Commission, such as orders, notices, and rulemakings.
    In addition, the Commission offers a free service called
eSubscription that allows you to keep track of all formal issuances and
submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time you
spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with
notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to
the documents. Go to www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp.

    Dated: October 26, 2018.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-23998 Filed 11-1-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: August 30, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 168)]
[Notices]
[Page 51610-51612]
[DOCID:fr30au06-99]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0162; FRL-8088-2]

Carbofuran; Interim Reregistration Eligibility Decision; Notice
of Availability

AGENCY:  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION:  Notice.

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

SUMMARY:  This notice announces the availability of EPA's Interim
Reregistration Eligibility Decision (IRED) for the N-methyl carbamate
pesticide carbofuran, and opens a public comment period on this
document. The Agency's risk assessments and other related documents
also are available in the carbofuran docket. Carbofuran works as a
cholinesterase inhibitor and is used to treat pests of food and non-
food crops as either a flowable or

granular formulation. It is registered for use on a variety of fruit
and vegetable crops, as well as ornamentals and agricultural fallow
land. EPA has reviewed carbofuran through the public participation
process that the Agency uses to involve the public in developing
pesticide reregistration and tolerance reassessment decisions. Through
these programs, EPA is ensuring that all pesticides meet current health
and safety standards.

DATES:  Comments must be received on or before October 30, 2006.

ADDRESSES:  Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0162, 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
Building), 2777 S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket'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 telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2005-0162. 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 Federal 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.
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
Building), 2777 S. Crystal Drive, 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 telephone number is (703)
305-5805.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Stephanie Plummer, 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, 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.

II. Background

A. What Action is the Agency Taking?

    Under section 4 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), EPA is reevaluating existing pesticides to
ensure that they meet current scientific and regulatory standards. EPA
completed an IRED for the N-methyl carbamate pesticide carbofuran on
August 3, 2006, and is now issuing this document for public comment.
Carbofuran works as a cholinesterase inhibitor and is used to treat
pests of food and non-food crops as either a flowable or granular
formulation. It is registered for use on a variety of fruit and
vegetable crops, as well as ornamentals and agricultural

fallow land. The carbofuran IRED presents the Agency's conclusions on
the risks posed by exposure to carbofuran alone; however, section
408(b)(2)(D)(v) of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA)
directs the Agency also to consider available information on the
cumulative risk from substances sharing a common mechanism of toxicity.
Because the N-methyl carbamate pesticides share a common mechanism of
toxicity, inhibition of the enzyme acetylcholinesterase, the Agency
will evaluate the cumulative risk posed by this group before making
final tolerance reassessment decisions for carbofuran..
    During the pendency of the N-methyl carbamate cumulative
assessment, the Agency is proceeding with risk assessments and interim
risk management for individual N-methyl carbamate pesticides. EPA has
determined that products containing carbofuran will not be eligible for
reregistration.
    EPA is applying the principles of public participation to all
pesticides undergoing reregistration and tolerance reassessment. The
Agency's Pesticide Tolerance Reassessment and Reregistration; Public
Participation Process, published in the Federal Register on May 14,
2004 (69 FR 26819)(FRL-7357-9), explains that in conducting these
programs, EPA is tailoring its public participation process to be
commensurate with the level of risk, extent of use, complexity of
issues, and degree of public concern associated with each pesticide.
Due to its uses, risks, and other factors, carbofuran was reviewed
through the full 6 phase public participation process. Through this
process, EPA worked extensively with stakeholders and the public to
reach the regulatory decisions for carbofuran.
    The reregistration program is being conducted under Congressionally
mandated time frames, and EPA recognizes the need both to make timely
reregistration decisions and to involve the public. The Agency is
issuing the carbofuran IRED for public comment. This comment period is
intended to provide an additional opportunity for public input and a
mechanism for initiating any necessary amendments to the IRED. All
comments should be submitted using the methods in ADDRESSES, and must
be received by EPA on or before the closing date. These comments will
become part of the Agency Docket for carbofuran. Comments received
after the close of the comment period will be marked ``late.'' EPA is
not required to consider these late comments.
     The Agency will carefully consider all comments received by the
closing date and will provide a Response to Comments Memorandum in the
Docket and regulations.gov. If any comment significantly affects the
document, EPA also will publish an amendment to the IRED in the Federal
Register. In the absence of substantive comments requiring changes, the
risk management decisions reflected in the carbofuran IRED will be
implemented as presented.

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

    Section 4(g)(2) of FIFRA as amended directs that, after submission
of all data concerning a pesticide active ingredient,`` the
Administrator shall determine whether pesticides containing such active
ingredient are eligible for reregistration,'' before calling in product
specific data on individual end-use products and either reregistering
products or taking other ``appropriate regulatory action.''
    Section 408(q) of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 346a(q), requires EPA to review
tolerances and exemptions for pesticide residues in effect as of August
2, 1996, to determine whether the tolerance or exemption meets the
requirements of section 408(b)(2) or (c)(2) of FFDCA. This review is to
be completed by August 3, 2006.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Pesticides and pests.

    Dated: August 14, 2006.
Debra Edwards,
Director, Special Review and Reregistration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. E6-14213 Filed 8-29-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 150 (Monday, August 9, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43411-43412]
[FR Doc No: 2021-16775]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0418; Airspace Docket No. 21-ACE-12]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of Class E Airspace; New Madrid, MO

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends Class E airspace extending upward from 700
feet above the surface at County Memorial Airport, New Madrid, MO. The
FAA is taking this action as a result of an airspace review caused by
the decommissioning of the Malden Very High Frequency Omnidirectional
Range (VOR) collocated with Tactical Air Navigation (VORTAC)
navigational aid as part of the VOR Minimum Operational Network (MON)
Program. Controlled airspace is necessary for the safety and management
of instrument flight rules (IFR) in the area.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, October 7, 2021. The Director of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by reference action under 1 CFR
part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.11 and
publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.11E, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can
contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; Telephone: (202) 267-
8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of FAA Order 7400.11E at NARA, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Fornito, Operations Support
Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, 1701
Columbia Avenue, College Park, GA 30337; Telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it amends the Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above
the surface in New Madrid, MO, to support IFR operations in the area.

History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal
Register (86 FR 30399, June 8, 2021) for Docket No. FAA-2021-0418 to
amend Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
at County Memorial Airport, New Madrid, MO, due to the decommissioning
of the Malden VORTAC.
    Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking
effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No
comments were received.
    Class E airspace designations are published in Paragraph 6005, of
FAA Order 7400.11E, dated July 21, 2020, and effective September 15,
2020, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order 7400.11E, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated July 21, 2020, and effective September 15,
2020. FAA Order 7400.11E is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11E lists Class A,
B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic routes, and reporting
points.

The Rule

    The FAA is amending 14 CFR part 71 by amending the Class E airspace
extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at County Memorial
Airport, New Madrid, MO, as the Malden VORTAC has been decommissioned
and all associated airspace extensions of Class E airspace extending
upward from 700 feet above the surface, off the Malden VORTAC, have
been eliminated. The Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface is amended by increasing the radius to 10.3 miles
(previously 6.3 miles).
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is minimal. Since this is a routine matter that only
affects air traffic procedures an air navigation, it is certified that
this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 5-6.5a. This airspace action is not expected to
cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1   [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11E,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated July 21, 2020, and
effective September 15, 2020, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

ACE MO E5 New Madrid, MO [Amended]

County Memorial Airport, New Madrid, MO
    (Lat. 36[deg]32'07'' N, long. 89[deg]35'59'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 10.3-mile radius of the County Memorial Airport.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on August 2, 2021.
Andreese C. Davis,
Manager, Airspace & Procedures Team South, Eastern Service Center, Air
Traffic Organization.
[FR Doc. 2021-16775 Filed 8-6-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P