[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 137 (Tuesday, July 17, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 41975]
[FR Doc No: 2012-17321]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project Nos. 2205-057, 2396-034, 2397-031, 2399-037, 2400-033, 2445-
024, 2489-046, 2490-028, 2558-032, 2731-042, 2737-022, 11475-015,
11478-014, and 12766-004]

Central Vermont Public Service Corporation; Green Mountain Power
Corporation; Notice of Application for Transfer of Licenses, and
Soliciting Comments and Motions To Intervene

    On June 28, 2012, Central Vermont Public Service Corporation
(transferor or CVPSC) and Green Mountain Power Corporation (transferee
or GMPC) filed an application to transfer the licenses and substitute
applicant for the following projects:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Project No.          Project name                 Location
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2205.............  Lamoille River         Lamoille River in Chittenden,
                    Hydroelectric.         Franklin, and Lamoille
                                           counties, Vermont.
2396.............  Pierce Mills           Passumpsic River in Caledonia
                    Hydroelectric.         County, Vermont.
2397.............  Gage Hydroelectric...  Passumpsic River in Caledonia
                                           County, Vermont.
2399.............  Arnold Falls           Passumpsic River in Caledonia
                    Hydroelectric.         County, Vermont.
2400.............  Passumpsic             Passumpsic River in Caledonia
                    Hydroelectric.         County, Vermont.
2445.............  Center Rutland         Otter Creek in Rutland County,
                    Hydroelectric.         Vermont.
2489.............  Cavendish              Black River in Windsor County,
                    Hydroelectric.         Vermont.
2490.............  Taftsville             Ottaquechee River in Windsor
                    Hydroelectric.         County, Vermont.
2558.............  Otter Creek..........  Otter Creek in Rutland County,
                                           Vermont.
2731.............  Weybridge              Otter Creek in Addison County,
                    Hydroelectric.         Vermont.
2737.............  Middlebury Lower       Otter Creek in Addison County,
                    Hydroelectric.         Vermont.
11475............  Carver Falls           Poultney River in Washington
                    Hydroelectric.         County, New York and Rutland
                                           County, Vermont.
11478............  Silver Lake            Sucker Brook in Addison
                    Hydroelectric.         County, Vermont.
12766............  Clay Hill Road         Six miles of 12.5 kV, three-
                    Transmission Line.     phase transmission line
                                           mounted on top of CVPSC's
                                           Line along Clay Hill Road
                                           from Pole 115 to
                                           CVPSC's Quechee substation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Applicants seek Commission approval to transfer the licenses for
the above projects from the transferor to the transferee.
    Applicants' Contact: Transferor: Mr. Michael Scarzello, P.E.,
Central Vermont Public Service Corporation, 77 Grove Street, Rutland,
VT 05701,<PHONE_NUMBER>. Transferee: Ms. Mari M. McClure, Esq.,
Corporate Attorney, Green Mountain Power Corporation, 163 Acorn Lane,
Colchester, VT 05446,<PHONE_NUMBER>. Also for the transferor and
transferee: Ms. Nicole S. Allen and Ms. Carmen L. Gentile, Bruder,
Gentile & Marcoux, LLP, 1701 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20006,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    FERC Contact: Patricia W. Gillis<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Deadline for filing comments and motions to intervene: 30 days from
the issuance date of this notice. Comments and motions to intervene may
be filed electronically via the Internet. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1) and
the instructions on the Commission's Web site under http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief
comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the
eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You
must include your name and contact information at the end of your
comments. If unable to be filed electronically, documents may be paper-
filed. To paper-file, an original plus seven copies should be mailed
to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. More information about this
project can be viewed or printed on the eLibrary link of Commission's
Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the
docket numbers (P-2205-057, P-2737-022, P-11475-015, P-11478-014, P-
12766-004, P-2490-028, P-2731-042, P-2396-034, P-2397-031, P-2399-037,
P-2400-033, P-2445-024, P-2489-046, and P-2558-32) in the docket number
field to access the document. For assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-
3372.

    Dated: July 9, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-17321 Filed 7-16-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: November 3, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 212)]
[Notices]
[Page 66885-66887]
[DOCID:fr03no05-97]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-52672; File No. SR-PCX-2005-121]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Pacific Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Add to
Its Current Revenue Sharing Program an Opportunity To Share in ETP
Operating Revenue for Cross Orders in Tape C Securities

October 25, 2005.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on October 21, 2005, the Pacific Exchange, Inc. (``PCX'' or
``Exchange''), through its wholly owned subsidiary, PCX Equities, Inc.
(``PCXE''), filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been prepared

by the Exchange. The Exchange filed the proposal pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act,\3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \4\ thereunder,\5\
which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission.
The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \5\ The Exchange provided the Commission with written notice of
its intention to file this proposed rule change on September 9,
2005. See Rule 19b-4(f)(6), 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend its rules governing the Archipelago
Exchange (``ArcaEx''), the equities trading facility of PCXE. With this
proposed rule change, the Exchange proposes to add to its current
revenue sharing program an opportunity to share in ETP Operating
Revenue for Cross Orders \6\ in Tape C securities. The text of the
proposed rule change is available at the PCX's Web site (http://www.pacificex.com
), at the PCX's principal office, and at the

Commission's Public Reference Room.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See PCXE Rule 7.31 for Cross Order definitions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for its proposal and discussed any
comments it received regarding the proposal. The text of these
statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below.
PCX has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B and C below, of
the most significant aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to modify the current ArcaEx revenue sharing
program applicable to Cross Orders executed in ArcaEx Tape C
securities. The Exchange proposes to add language to the ArcaEx fee
schedule describing the new ETP Operating Revenue sharing program. The
proposal is similar to revenue sharing programs currently in place at
the Nasdaq Stock Market and the National Stock Exchange,\7\ although it
will be a more narrow application of such programs because it is
limited to Cross Orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 48303 (August 8,
2003), 68 FR 48654 (August 14, 2003) and 46688 (October 18, 2002),
67 FR 65816 (October 28, 2002). The NSX program includes book fees
and technology fees, and the Nasdaq program includes technology
fees. ArcaEx does not charge technology fees or book fees, and as
such, these fees are not included in the proposed calculation of ETP
Operating Revenue, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the proposal, ETP Holders would be eligible to share in ETP
Operating Revenue (``ETPOR'') associated with Cross Orders in Tape C
securities. Specifically, ETPOR is defined as operating revenue that is
generated by ETP Holders and consists of transaction fees and market
data revenue that is attributable to ETP Holders' Cross Order
executions. ETPOR shall not include any investment income or regulatory
monies.
    The sharing of ETPOR shall be based on each ETP Holder's pro rata
contribution to ETPOR and the amount shared shall not exceed ETPOR.
Under the proposal, PCX's Board of Directors would have the authority
to determine the appropriate amount of ETPOR to be shared with ETP
Holders. In making this determination, the Board would balance the
objective of sharing a meaningful percentage of ETPOR with the
objective of maintaining ArcaEx's financial integrity.\8\ Such payments
would be made quarterly after ArcaEx has accounted for operating
expenses and working capital contributions. ArcaEx proposes to
implement such changes effective November 1, 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Regulatory fees are currently separately allocated to PCX
and as such, ArcaEx will not compromise funds that would be used for
regulatory responsibilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A specific example of how the proposal would be implemented
follows.
    First, the number of cross order executions in Tape C securities
would be determined by ETP Holder for the quarter. Second, transaction
fees and market data revenue (ETPOR) associated with such executions
would be calculated. Third, PCX's Board of Directors would determine
what percentage of ETPOR would be shared with ETP Holders. Fourth, that
percentage would be allocated on a pro rata basis to ETP Holders based
on their relative number of cross order executions in Tape C
securities.
    The rationale for these changes is to reduce the costs incurred by
ETP Holders in executing Cross Orders on ArcaEx and to make the pricing
for executions on the ArcaEx more competitive. The Exchange evaluated
the economics of modifying its current revenue sharing program and
determined that is [sic] was feasible and appropriate, given the costs
involved and competitive concerns.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) \9\ of the Act, in general, and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5),\10\ in particular, because it is
designed to facilitate transactions in securities, to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, to enhance competition, and to protect
investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

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

    Written comments on the proposed rule change were neither solicited
nor received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not:
    (i) Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest;
    (ii) Impose any significant burden on competition; and
    (iii) Become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was
filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has
become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \11\ and
Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\12\ At any time within 60 days of the
filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily
abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such
action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the
protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of
the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The PCX has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative
delay. The Commission believes waiving the 30-day operative delay is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest.
Such waiver will allow the PCX to implement competitive pricing of
ArcaEx Cross Orders in Tape

C securities. For these reasons, the Commission designates the proposal
to be effective and operative upon filing with the Commission.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml.
); or     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-PCX-2005-121 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE,
Washington, DC 20549-9303.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-PCX-2005-121. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ rules/

sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the PCX.
    All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission
does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You
should submit only information that you wish to make available
publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-PCX-2005-121
and should be submitted on or before November 25, 2005.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E5-6083 Filed 11-2-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


			  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

		        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

			  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

			          WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation on June 2, 2006

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-2004-16945

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Joint Application of COMPANIA MEXICANA DE AVIACION, S.A. DE C.V.
(MEXICANA) AND AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC. (AMERICAN), filed 4/17/06 for:

XX  Exemption for American under 49 U.S.C. 40109 to provide the
following service:

Scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property, and mail
between Fresno, California, and Guadalajara, Mexico.  American intends
to operate this service pursuant to a code-share arrangement with
Mexicana, whereby the “AA*” designator code will be placed on
flights operated by Mexicana in this market.  The joint applicants
request that the exemption authority be granted for a period
co-extensive with the exemptions granted previously to American in the
instant docket (through March 22, 2008).

XX  Amended statement of authorization for Mexicana under 14 CFR Part
212 to:

Display American’s “AA*” designator code on flights operated by
Mexicana between Fresno, California, and Guadalajara, Mexico.

Applicant reps: Carl B. Nelson, Jr. (American)<PHONE_NUMBER> and
Charles F. Donley II (Mexicana)<PHONE_NUMBER>

DOT Analyst:   Linda L. Lundell<PHONE_NUMBER>

D I S P O S I T I O N

XX  Granted (subject to conditions, see below)

The above action granting new exemption authority to American was
effective when taken:

June 2, 2006, through March 22, 2008.

The above action granting an amended statement of authorization to
Mexicana was effective when taken: June 2, 2006, and will remain in
effect indefinitely, subject to the conditions below.

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director

		      Office of International Aviation

XX  The authority granted is consistent with the aviation agreement
between the United States and Mexico.

Except to the extent exempted or waived, this authority is subject to
the terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:

	XX   American’s certificates of public convenience and necessity

	XX   Standard exemption conditions (attached)

Conditions:   The U.S.-Mexico exemption authority granted is subject to
the dormancy notice requirements set forth in condition 7 of Appendix A
of Order 88-10-2, and is limited to code-share services only.

The Statement of Authorization granted to Mexicana is subject to the
following conditions:

(a) The statement of authorization will remain in effect only as long as
American and Mexicana continue to hold the underlying authority to
operate the code-share services at issue, and the code-share agreement
providing for the code-share operations remains in effect.

(b) American and/or Mexicana must promptly notify the Department (Office
of International Aviation) if the code-share agreement is no longer
effective or if the carriers decide to cease operating all or a portion
of the approved code-share services. (Such notice should be filed in
Docket OST-2004-16945.)

(c) The code-sharing operations conducted under this authority must
comply with 14 CFR 257 and with any amendment to the Department’s
regulations concerning code-share arrangements that may be adopted.
Notwithstanding any provisions in the contract between the carriers, our
approval here is expressly conditioned upon the requirements that the
subject foreign air transportation be sold in the name of the carrier
holding out such service in computer reservation systems and elsewhere;
that the carrier selling such transportation (i.e., the carrier shown on
the ticket) accept responsibility for the entirety of the code-share
journey for all obligations established in its contract of carriage with
the passenger; and that the passenger liability of the operating carrier
be unaffected.

(d) The authority granted here is specifically conditioned so that
neither American nor Mexicana shall give any force or effect to any
contractual provisions between themselves that are contrary to these
conditions.

________________________________________________________________________
___

On the basis of data officially noticeable under Rule 24(g) of the
Department's regulations, we found American qualified to provide the
exemption services authorized.

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (2) grant of the authority was consistent with the public
interest; and (3) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.
To the extent not granted, we denied all requests in the referenced
Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority granted in this
Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR
§385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date
of issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and
the filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

  HYPERLINK "http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp"
http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp

APPENDIX

U.S. Carrier Exemption Conditions

In the conduct of the operations authorized, the U.S. carrier
applicant(s) shall:

(1)  Hold at all times effective operating authority from the government
of each country served;

(2)  Comply with applicable requirements concerning oversales contained
in 14 CFR 250 (for scheduled operations, if authorized);

(3)  Comply with the requirements for reporting data contained in 14 CFR
241;

(4)  Comply with requirements for minimum insurance coverage, and for
certifying that coverage to the Department, contained in 14 CFR 205;

(5)  Except as specifically exempted or otherwise provided for in a
Department Order, comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 203, concerning
waiver of Warsaw Convention liability limits and defenses;

(6)  Comply with all applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration and with all applicable U.S. Government requirements
concerning security, including, but not limited to, 49 CFR Part 1544.
To assure compliance with all applicable U.S. Government requirements
concerning security, the holder shall, before commencing any new service
(including charter flights) to or from a foreign airport, contact its
International Principal Security Inspector (IPSI) to advise the IPSI of
its plans and to find out whether the Transportation Security
Administration has determined that security is adequate to allow such
airport(s) to be served; and

(7)  Comply with such other reasonable terms, conditions, and
limitations required by the public interest as may be prescribed by the
Department of Transportation, with all applicable orders and regulations
of other U.S. agencies and courts, and with all applicable laws of the
United States.

The authority granted shall be effective only during the period when the
holder is in compliance with the conditions imposed above.

										  05/2004

 Mexicana holds Fresno-Guadalajara operating authority pursuant to an
exemption granted in Docket OST-2004-17492, last renewed June 9, 2005.
(Department action on its timely renewal application is pending.)

 We expect this notification to be received within 10 days of such
non-effectiveness or of such decision.


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 164 (Friday, August 27, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48139-48141]
[FR Doc No: 2021-18490]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2021-0015; FRL-8842-01-OCSPP]

Product Cancellation Order for Certain Pesticide Registrations

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces EPA's order for the cancellations,
voluntarily requested by the registrants and accepted by the Agency, of
the products listed in Table 1 of Unit II, pursuant to the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). This cancellation
order follows a June 17, 2021 Federal Register Notice of Receipt of
Requests from the registrants listed in Table 2 of Unit II to
voluntarily cancel these product registrations. In the June 17, 2021
notice, EPA indicated that it would issue an order implementing the
cancellations, unless the Agency received substantive comments within
the 30-day comment period that would merit its further review of these
requests, or unless the registrants withdrew their requests. The Agency
did not receive any comments on the notice. Further, the registrants
did not withdraw their requests. Accordingly, EPA hereby issues in this
notice a cancellation order granting the requested cancellations. Any
distribution, sale, or use of the products subject to this cancellation
order is permitted only in accordance with the terms of this order,
including any existing stocks provisions.

DATES: The cancellations are effective August 27, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Green, Registration
Division (7502P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of
interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human
health, 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.

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

    The docket for this action, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2021-0015, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Please review the visitor instructions and
additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Due to the public health concerns related to COVID-19, the EPA
Docket Center (EPA/DC) and Reading Room is closed to visitors with
limited exceptions. The staff continues to provide remote customer
service via email, phone, and webform. For the latest status
information on EPA/DC services and docket access, visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. What action is the Agency taking?

    This notice announces the cancellation, as requested by
registrants, of products registered under FIFRA section 3 (7 U.S.C.
136a). These registrations are listed in sequence by registration
number in Table 1 of this unit.

                                         Table 1--Product Cancellations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Registration No.              Company No.           Product name               Active ingredients
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7969-376.............................            7969  Certador Insecticide........  Dinotefuran.
59639-182............................           59639  V-10276 0.088 SL Insecticide/ Metconazole & Dinotefuran.
                                                        Fungicide.
91234-161............................           91234  Anniston 30 SG Insecticide..  Acetamiprid.
91234-162............................           91234  Anniston 70 WP Insecticide..  Acetamiprid.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 2 of this unit includes the names and addresses of record for
all registrants of the products in Table 1 of this unit, in sequence by
EPA company number. This number corresponds to the first part of the
EPA registration numbers of the products listed in Table 1 of this
unit.

               Table 2--Registrants of Cancelled Products
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      EPA company No.                  Company name and address
------------------------------------------------------------------------
7969.......................  BASF Corporation, 26 Davis Drive, P.O. Box
                              13528, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-
                              3528.
59639......................  Valent U.S.A. LLC, 4600 Norris Canyon Road,
                              P.O. Box 5075, San Ramon, CA 94583.
91234......................  Atticus, LLC, Agent Name: Pyxis Regulatory
                              Consulting, Inc., 4110 136th Street Ct.
                              NW, Gig Harbor, WA 98332-9122.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Summary of Public Comments Received and Agency Response to
Comments

    During the public comment period provided, EPA received no comments
in response to the notice that published in the Federal Register of
June 17, 2021 (86 FR 32259) (FRL-10024-90), announcing the Agency's
receipt of the requests for voluntary cancellations of products listed
in Table 1 of Unit II.

IV. Cancellation Order

    Pursuant to FIFRA section 6(f) (7 U.S.C. 136d(f)), EPA hereby
approves the requested cancellations of the registrations identified in
Table 1 of Unit II. Accordingly, the Agency hereby orders that the
product registrations identified in Table 1 of Unit II are canceled.
The effective date of the cancellations that are the subject of this
notice is August 27, 2021. Any distribution, sale, or use of existing
stocks of the products identified in Table 1 of Unit II in a manner
inconsistent with any of the provisions for disposition of existing
stocks set forth in Unit VI will be a violation of FIFRA.

V. What is the Agency's authority for taking this action?

    Section 6(f)(1) of FIFRA (7 U.S.C. 136d(f)(1)) provides that a
registrant of a pesticide product may at any time request that any of
its pesticide registrations be canceled or amended to terminate one or
more uses. FIFRA further provides that, before acting on the request,
EPA must publish a notice of receipt of any such request in the Federal
Register. Thereafter, following the public comment period, the EPA
Administrator may approve such a request. The notice of receipt for
this action was published for comment in the Federal Register of June
17, 2021 (86 FR 32259) (FRL-10024-90). The comment period closed on
July 19, 2021.

VI. Provisions for Disposition of Existing Stocks

    Existing stocks are those stocks of registered pesticide products
which are currently in the United States and which were packaged,
labeled, and released for shipment prior to the effective date of the
cancellation action. The existing stocks provisions for the products
subject to this order are as follows.
    The registrants may continue to sell and distribute existing stocks
of products listed in Table 1 of Unit II until August 29, 2022, which
is 1 year after the publication of the Cancellation Order in the
Federal Register. Thereafter, the registrants are prohibited from
selling or distributing products listed in Table 1, except for export
in accordance with FIFRA section 17 (7 U.S.C. 136o), or proper
disposal. Persons other than the registrants may sell, distribute, or
use existing stocks of products listed in Table 1 of Unit II

until existing stocks are exhausted, provided that such sale,
distribution, or use is consistent with the terms of the previously
approved labeling on, or that accompanied, the canceled products.
    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.

    Dated: August 20, 2021.
Catherine Aubee,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. 2021-18490 Filed 8-26-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: March 9, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 44)]
[Notices]
[Page 10104-10107]
[DOCID:fr09mr09-92]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-59486; File No. SR-NYSE-2009-16]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change
To Amend NYSE Rule 17 To Address Issues Related to Vendor Liability and
To Make Amendments and Conforming Changes to NYSE Rule 18

March 2, 2009.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby given
that, on February 17, 2009, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. The Exchange filed the proposed rule change pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) \4\ of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder,\5\
which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission.
The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \5\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend NYSE Rule 17 (``Use of Exchange
Facilities'') to address issues related to vendor liability. The
Exchange also seeks to make amendments and conforming changes to NYSE
Rule 18 (``Compensation in Relation to Exchange System Failure''). The
text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange, the
Commission's Public Reference Room, and http://www.nyse.com.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization
included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the
proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of those statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared
summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most
significant aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend NYSE Rule 17 (``Use of Exchange
Facilities'') to address issues related to vendor liability.
Specifically, the proposed rule would require that member organizations
that have trading losses due to malfunctions of third-party systems
provided by the Exchange submit such losses to the Exchange's
compensation fund prior to pursuing legal remedies against the vendors
that provided these third-party systems.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See E-mail from Jennifer D. Kim, Counsel, Office of the
General Counsel, Exchange, to Michou H.M. Nguyen, Special Counsel,
Division of Trading and Markets, Commission, on March 2, 2009
(``March 2nd E-mail'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also seeks to make amendments and conforming changes
to NYSE Rule 18 (``Compensation in Relation to Exchange System
Failure''). Specifically, the Exchange seeks to include in the
definition of ``Exchange system failure'' the malfunction of a third-
party system or technology provided by the Exchange, i.e., vendor and/
or subcontractor systems and to codify a net loss requirement for
members or member organizations that seek compensation for losses
sustained from an Exchange system failure.
    The Exchange notes that parallel changes are proposed to be made to
the rules of the NYSE Alternext Exchange (formerly the American Stock
Exchange).\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See SR-NYSEALTR-2009-13 (filed February 17, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Background
    On July 10, 2008, the Exchange amended NYSE Rule 17 (``Rule
Amendment'') to provide, among other things, that its vendors and/or
its subcontractors of electronic systems, services or facilities
(``third-party vendors'') would not be liable for any loss sustained by
a member or member organization arising from use of the third-party
vendors.\8\ The amended rule further required members and member
organizations to indemnify the Exchange and its vendors and/or
subcontractors and set forth certain provisions that the Exchange could
include in contracts connected to a member or member organization's use
of any electronic systems, services or facilities provided by the
third-party vendors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58137 (July 10,
2008), 73 FR 41145 (July 17, 2008) (SR-NYSE-2008-55). The amendments
to NYSE Rule 17 were based on American Stock Exchange (``Amex'')
Rule 60.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The impetus behind this amendment stemmed from exchanges' increased
reliance on third-party vendors to provide additional systems or
services. The use of third-party vendors enables exchanges to increase
their capacity to deliver faster and more efficient trading tools to
market, with the ultimate beneficiaries being the investing public. In
order for the Exchange to remain competitive and remove impediments to,
and perfect the mechanism of, a free and open market, the Exchange
relies on third-party vendor services to play a significant role in
timely providing systems and tools to Exchange members that assist the
Exchange in achieving its goals and remain competitive.
    In recognition of the fact that Exchange-maintained systems co-
exist with, and are often indistinguishable from, vendor-maintained
systems that the Exchange provides access to as a conduit, the Exchange
filed the Rule Amendment, implementing a vendor liability disclaimer
that indemnified the Exchange and third-party vendors from any damages
sustained by a member or member organization growing out of the use or
enjoyment thereof by the member or member organization, as well as from
any and all judgments, damages, costs, or losses of any kind (including
reasonable attorneys' fees and expenses), as a result of any claim,
action, or proceeding that arose out of or relates to the member or
member organization's use of such electronic system, service, or
facility.
    After the immediately effectiveness filing, the Exchange received
feedback on the rule from its members and customer constituencies.
Based on that feedback, the Exchange recognized the risk presented to
members and member organizations with regard to requiring members and
member organizations to indemnify the Exchange vendors and its
subcontractors. The Exchange therefore rescinded the vendor liability
provisions of NYSE Rule 17 (in particular, paragraph (b) of the amended
rule), thereby reverting the rule to its original content prior to the
effectiveness of SR-NYSE-2008-55 [sic].\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act No. 58850 (October 24, 2008), 73
FR 64998 (October 31, 2008) (SR-NYSE-2008-107).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange now re-proposes to amend NYSE Rule 17 and 18 to create
a proposed rule that addresses issues of liability for all parties
concerned.
Proposed Amendments
    Currently, NYSE Rule 17 provides that the Exchange shall not be
liable for any damages sustained by a member or member organization
growing out of the use or enjoyment of the facilities afforded by the
Exchange, except as provided in NYSE Rule 18. Currently, NYSE Rule 18
affords members and member organizations the recourse to seek
compensation for losses sustained by an Exchange system failure.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ An ``Exchange system failure'' is defined by NYSE Rule 18
as ``a malfunction of the Exchange's physical equipment, devices
and/or programming which results in an incorrect execution or an
order or no execution of an order that was received in Exchange
systems.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted previously, the Exchange increasingly offers member
organizations access to certain systems and technologies that are
supplied by third-party vendors and delivered via Exchange systems
(e.g., the Exchange delivers broker algorithms to brokers on the broker
handheld device). These third-party products are designed to enhance
the member organizations' ability to execute trades efficiently.
Notably, the Exchange is acting primarily as a facilitator between the
vendor and the Exchange member using the service. Use of these vendor-
supplied services is not required, and Exchange members can perform
their respective jobs without using these third-party vendor services.
If a member wishes to use such a service, however,

the Exchange works with the vendor and the member to connect the member
and to deliver the service from the vendor to the user. The Exchange
also simplifies the negotiation process, in that a member does not need
to separately negotiate with the vendor to receive the service. Because
the services are supplied and supported by a third-party vendor,
however, they are not explicitly ``systems or facilities of the
Exchange.'' \11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Exchange services that are outsourced to third-party
vendors but that are part of the sore functionality of NYSE systems
are considered ``systems and facilities of the Exchange'' even
though they are not physically provided by the Exchange. By
contrast, additional services provided to members and member
organizations by a third-party vendor that aren ot part of the core
functionality of the NYSE's systems and not required to function as
a member or member organization are not considered ``systems and
facilities of the Exchange.'' As a result, any malfunction of those
additional services would constitute a third-party vendor system
malfunction, not an Exchange malfunction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, NYSE Rules 17 and 18 do not address the issue of a
member or member organization that sustains a loss arising from the
malfunction of non-core systems or technology supplied by third-party
vendors for use by member organizations.\12\ In light of the increased
availability of third-party technology to provide additional facilities
or services to the Exchange, the Exchange proposes to amend NYSE Rules
17 and 18 to address third-party vendor liability, third-party vendor
system malfunction and the avenue of recourse for members and member
organizations as a result of this third-party vendor system
malfunction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The third-party vendors directly provide their services to
the member or member organization. Therefore, the customers are
aware that they are using an Exchange system, which is provided
directly by the Exchange, or a third-party vendor system, that also
has direct contact with the customer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In connection with member or member organization use of any third-
party vendors provided by the Exchange to members for the conduct of
their business on the Exchange, the Exchange proposes that NYSE Rule 17
provide that the Exchange shall not be liable for any damages sustained
by a member, allied member or member organization growing out of the
use or enjoyment by such member, allied member or member organization
of a third-party electronic system, service, or facility provided by
the Exchange, except as provided in NYSE Rule 18.
    The Exchange further proposes that members or member organizations
that sustain a loss from the use of these third-party vendors provided
by the Exchange may seek compensation from the Exchange for their
losses in the same way they seek compensation for an Exchange system
failure. Specifically, NYSE Rule 18 would permit members or member
organizations to file a claim with the Exchange for losses caused by
the third-party vendor's malfunction.
    In the event that claims arising out of the use of these third-
party vendor systems cannot be fully satisfied because the aggregated
claims exceed the funds available for such payment as set forth in NYSE
Rule 18, the aggrieved member or member organization would not be
precluded from bringing a claim against the third-party vendor directly
for the balance of the loss amount.
    The Exchange also seeks to make a conforming amendment to NYSE Rule
18 to include in the definition of an Exchange system failure ``any
malfunction of any third-party vendor provided by the Exchange that
result in an incorrect execution of an order or no execution of an
order that was received in Exchange systems.''
    Finally, the Exchange seeks to codify its existing policy regarding
the netting of losses prior to submitting claims under NYSE Rule 18.
Specifically, the Exchange is codifying its understanding that if
members and member organizations retain profits from a system
malfunction, then they are required to net these profits against their
losses from the same malfunction before submitting any claims under
NYSE Rule 18.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Related system malfunctions that occur repeatedly over the
course of the trading day will constitute one system malfunction for
purposes of determining the aggregation of customer claims resulting
from that system malfunction. Distinct and separate malfunctions
that originate from different system failures are considered
unrelated malfunctions and are treated as separate system
malfunctions.
    A member organization that sustains such loss is required to
give oral notice by the market opening on the next business day
following the system failure and written notice by the end of the
third business day following the system failure (T+3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For example, a broker enters orders for Customer 1 and
Customer 2. As a result of a system malfunction, Customer
1 derives a profit that would have occurred but for the
malfunction and Customer 2 derives a loss. The broker passes
along the gain to Customer 1, and files a claim with the
Exchange with respect to Customer 2's loss. The broker would
not be required to net the gain against the loss.
    Brokers are required to offer profitable errors to their customers;
in certain circumstances, however, customers may decline to take the
error in which case the error position is retained by the brokers.\14\
If Customer 1 declines to accept the profit, as is the
customer's option, then the broker would retain the profit and must net
is against the loss incurred on behalf of Customer 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Customers may decline to take the gains for varied reasons.
For example, if the cost to the customer of processing the error is
greater than the amount of the error, the customer will likely tell
the broker to keep the error.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\15\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\16\ in particular, in that it is designed to
prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just
and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect
the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system,
and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. The
Exchange believes that the proposed rule change promotes just and
equitable principles of trade and protects investors and the public
interest because it creates a mechanism that adequately addresses
issues of liability for all parties concerned.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    The Exchange received feedback from its constituents raising
concerns about the possible risk presented to members and member
organizations with regard to the provisions of NYSE Rule 17 that
require members and member organizations to indemnify Exchange vendors
and the subcontractors of vendors. Specifically, constituents expressed
concern that the NYSE rule could have an adverse effect on their
businesses in the event of a system malfunction that resulted in
financial losses, since the prior rule not only limited their abilities
to pursue legal action against the vendors, but also required the
member organizations themselves to indemnify vendors for losses. They
noted in addition that, as filed, the prior rule did not permit member
organizations to seek compensation through the NYSE's Rule 18 process
for losses caused by vendors and therefore felt that the limitation on
liability was unduly burdensome. This rule proposal is submitted in
light of

these comments received in response to NYSE's filing, SR-NYSE-2008-
55.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See March 2nd E-mail, supra note 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The proposed rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act.\18\ The Exchange asserts that the
proposed rule change (i) will not significantly affect the protection
of investors or the public interest, (ii) will not impose any
significant burden on competition, and (iii) by its terms, will not
become operative for 30 days after the date of this filing, or such
shorter time as the Commission may designate, if consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \19\ In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) requires a self-
regulatory organization to give the Commission written notice of its
intent to file the proposed rule change at least five business days
prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such
shorter time as designated by the Commission. The Exchange has
satisfied this requirement. 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the instant filing is non-controversial.
The Commission has approved a third-party vendor liability provision
that was filed by the American Stock Exchange which required members
and member organizations to indemnify the Exchange and its vendors and/
or subcontractors and provided that such vendor and its subcontractors
shall not be liable to the member or member organization for any
damages sustained by a member or member organization from use of these
third-party vendor systems.\20\ The Exchange submits that its proposed
rule change is less expansive that Amex Rule 60--AEMI and affords a
member or member organization the ability to recover from a loss
sustained by use of a third-party vendor system. The proposed rule
change offers its members and member organizations two layers of
recourse in the event of a third-party vendor system malfunction, i.e.,
filing a claim pursuant to NYSE Rule 18 and then filing a claim
directly against the third-party vendor for any remaining balance of
the loss amount. Therefore, the Exchange submits that this proposed
rule filing, in light of the more restrictive vendor liability
disclaimer rules previously approved by the Commission, is non-
controversial.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ Amex Rule 60--AEMI (``Vendor Liability Disclaimer''). AEMI
(``Auction & Electronic Market Integration'') System was Amex's
Hybrid Market Structure for equities and exchange-traded funds prior
to the merger with NYSE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes this rule amendment in light of feedback from
its member and customer constituencies. Accordingly, the Exchange
submits that this proposed amendment is non-controversial and reflects
the public interest.
    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise
in furtherance of the purposes of the Exchange Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSE-2009-16 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2009-16. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/
sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2009-16 and should be
submitted on or before March 30, 2009.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E9-4874 Filed 3-6-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


BEFOREEE THE

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20590

In the matter of :

INTRA-ALAKSA CLASS					         DOCKET 14694

SERVICE MAIL RATES					         DOCKET 14695

EQUALIZATION NOTEICE OF TANANA AIR SERVICE

Bidzy Ta Hot Aana, Corp, dba Tanana Air Service, an Alaska carrier currently authorized to transport United States Mail, hereby gives notice of its intent to equalize its mail rate to the lowest authorized rate legally in effect over all routes on its system, either directly or indirectly.

1.	By Order 2004-2-12, the Department of Transportation established a new linehaul rate for market where Part 121 bush service is provided by aircraft certificated by the manufacturer for 19 seats or more on one flight a week or more.  The language of he Order sets the rate “for markets where a carrier scheduling and operating at least one round trip a week with Part 121 aircraft in passenger service qualifies for the carriage of Mail”. This language establishes a single lawful rate for each market, and appears to obviate the need for any sort of equalization notice. None-the-less, with an abundance of caution, Tanana Air Service hereby gives notice of its equalization to the lowest rate in any market where it operates service.

2.	Tanana Air Service equalizes its rates to the lowest rate, or combination of rates, applicable in the markets it serves directly or by connection at an intermediate point.

3.	Equalization under this notice is effective immediately, and is effective for an indefinite period. This notice will remain in effect until terminated by written notice filed at least ten days in advance.

Whereas Tanana Air Service gives this notice of equalization of its mail rates, Tanana Air Service requests equitable tender and full tender of bypass to the provisions of the Rural Service Improvement Act and the practices and procedures of the Department of Transportation and the United States Postal Service.

Respectfully submitted,

Fred H. Ciarlo

General Manager


[Federal Register: April 2, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 63)]
[Notices]
[Page 16900-16901]
[DOCID:fr02ap10-141]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Intent To Rule on Request To Release Airport Property
at the Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport, Hebron, KY

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Request for Public Comment.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Administration is requesting public
comment on the release of land at the Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky
International Airport in the city of Hebron, Kentucky. This property,
approximately 75.88 acres of fee simple release, and approximately
28.48 acres of requested easement, will change to a non-aeronautical
use. This action is taken under the provisions of Section 125 of the
Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment Reform Act for the 21st Century
(AIR 21).

DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 3, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Documents are available for review at the Cincinnati/
Northern Kentucky International Airport, 2939 Terminal Drive, 2nd Floor
Administration, Hebron, KY 41048 and the FAA Airports District Office,
2862 Business Park Drive, Building G, Memphis, TN 38118. Written
comments on the Sponsor's request must be delivered or mailed to: Mr.
Phillip J. Braden, Manager, Memphis Airports District Office, 2862
Business Park Drive, Building G, Memphis, TN 38118.
    In addition, a copy of any comments submitted to the FAA must be
mailed or delivered to Ms. Barbara Schempf, Government Affairs/Noise
Abatement Officer, P. O. Box 752000, Cincinnati, OH 45275.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Tommy L. Dupree, Team lead/Civil
Engineer, Federal Aviation Administration, Memphis Airports District
Office, 2862 Business Park Drive, Building G, Memphis, TN 38118. The
application may be reviewed in person at this same location, by
appointment.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA proposes to rule and invites public
comment on the request to release property at the Cincinnati/Northern
Kentucky International Airport, Hebron, KY. Under the provisions of AIR
21(49 U.S.C. 47107(h)(2)).
    On March 25, 2010, the FAA determined that the request to release
property at Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport meets
the procedural requirements of the Federal Aviation Administration. The
FAA may approve the request, in whole or in part, no later than May 3,
2010.
    The following is a brief overview of the request:
    The Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport is proposing
the release of approximately 75.88 acres of fee simple release, and
approximately 28.48 acres of requested easement to accommodate the
construction of a new by-pass road connector by the Boone County, KY
government.

    Any person may inspect, by appointment, the request in person at
the FAA office listed above under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    In addition, any person may, upon appointment and request, inspect
the request, notice and other documents germane to the request in
person at the Tennessee Department of Transportation, Division of
Aeronautics.

    Issued in Memphis, TN on March 25, 2010.
Phillip J. Braden,
Manager, Memphis Airports District Office, Southern Region.
[FR Doc. 2010-7416 Filed 4-1-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P


[Federal Register: April 21, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 77)]
[Notices]
[Page 21340]
[DOCID:fr21ap08-72]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. OA07-101-001]

El Paso Electric Company; Notice of Filing

April 11, 2008.
    Take notice that on April 10, 2008, El Paso Electric Company,
pursuant to section 206 of the Federal Power Act, submitted a revised
Attachment C of its Open Access Transmission Tariff.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests 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. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions 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 or intervention 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 1, 2008.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-8490 Filed 4-18-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: February 20, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 34)]
[Notices]
[Page 9313]
[DOCID:fr20fe08-50]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. OR07-22-000]

BP West Coast Products LLC, Complainant, v. Calnev Pipe Line LLC,
Respondent; Notice of Amended Complaint

February 13, 2008.
    Take notice that on February 11, 2008, BP West Coast Products LLC
(BP) tendered for filing its First Amended Second Original complaint
against Calnev Pipe Line LLC (Calnev), challenging all of Calnev's
transportation and terminalling rates as unjust and unreasonable. BP
requests that the Commission review and investigate Calnev's rates; set
the proceeding for an evidentiary hearing to determine just and
reasonable rates for Calnev; require the payment of refunds and
reparations starting two years before the date of complaint for all
rates; and award such other relief as is necessary and appropriate
under the Interstate Commerce Act.
    BP states that copies the complaint were served on Calnev.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests 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. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. The Respondent's
answer and all interventions, or protests must be filed on or before
the comment date. The Respondent's answer, motions to intervene, and
protests must be served on the Complainants.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions 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 or intervention 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 March 3, 2008.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-3121 Filed 2-19-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 28 (Friday, February 10, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 8751-8752]
[FR Doc No: 2023-02822]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 73

[Docket No. FAA-2023-0307; Airspace Docket No. 22-AAL-78]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of Restricted Areas R-2204 Oliktok Point High and R-
2204 Oliktok Point Low; AK

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends the using agency listed for restricted
areas R-2204 Oliktok Point High, AK, and R-2204 Oliktok Point Low, AK,
from ``Department of Energy, Office of Science, Washington DC'' to
``Department of Energy, Arctic Energy Office, Washington, DC.'' This
action does not change any boundaries, altitudes, times of designation,
or activities conducted within the restricted areas.

DATES: Effective date 0901 UTC, April 20, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven Roff, Rules and Regulations
Group, Office of Policy, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

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
the 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 updates the using agency listed for restricted areas R-
2204 Oliktok Point High, AK, and R-2204 Oliktok Point Low, AK.

Background

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) requested that the Federal
Aviation Administration amend the descriptions of restricted areas R-
2204 Oliktok Point High, AK, and R-2204 Oliktok Point Low, AK, by
changing the using agency listed for each from ``Department of Energy,
Office of Science, Washington, DC'' to ``Department of Energy, Arctic
Energy Office, Washington, DC''. The request is the result of the DOE
re-establishing the Arctic Energy Office with an office in Fairbanks,
AK, and determining it to be in the best interest of the DOE that the
Arctic Energy Office undertake the using agency responsibilities for
the R-2204 Oliktok Point High and R-2204 Oliktok Point Low restricted
areas. Both DOE offices, the Office of Science, Biological and
Environmental Research and the Arctic Energy Office, support the using
agency change.

The Rule

    This action amends 14 CFR part 73 by changing the using agency name
listed for restricted areas R-2204 Oliktok Point High and R-2204
Oliktok Point Low, AK, from ``Department of Energy, Office of Science,
Washington DC'' to ``Department of Energy, Arctic Energy Office,
Washington, DC''. This action is necessary in order to reflect the
current organization tasked with using agency responsibilities for the
restricted areas.
    This is an administrative change that does not affect the
boundaries, designated altitudes, times of designation, or activities
conducted within restricted areas R-2204 Oliktok Point High and R-2204
Oliktok Point

Low, AK; therefore, notice and public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)
are unnecessary.

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
Department of Transportation (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 so minimal.
Since this is a routine matter that only affects air traffic procedures
and 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 of amending the using
agency information for R-2204 Oliktok Point High and R-2204 Oliktok
Point Low, AK, qualifies for categorical exclusion under the National
Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and its implementing
regulations at 40 CFR part 1500, and in accordance with FAA Order
1050.1F ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures,'' paragraph
5-6.5a, which categorically excludes from further environmental impact
review rulemaking actions that designate or modify classes of airspace
areas, airways, routes, and reporting points (see 14 CFR part 71,
Designation of Class A, B, C, D, and E Airspace Areas; Air Traffic
Service Routes; and Reporting Points), and paragraph 5-6.5d, which
categorically excludes from further environmental impact review the
modification of the technical description of special use airspace (SUA)
that does not alter the dimensions, altitudes, or times of designation
of the airspace (such as changes in designation of the controlling or
using agency, or correction of typographical errors). This airspace
action is an administrative change to the description of restricted
areas R-2204 Oliktok Point High and R-2204 Oliktok Point Low, AK, to
update the using agency name. It does not alter the restricted area
dimensions, designated altitudes, times of designation, or use of the
airspace. Therefore, this airspace action is not expected to result in
any significant environmental impacts. In accordance with FAA Order
1050.1F, paragraph 5-2 regarding Extraordinary Circumstances, this
action has been reviewed for factors and circumstances in which a
normally categorically excluded action may have a significant
environmental impact requiring further analysis. The FAA has determined
that no extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of
an environmental assessment or environmental impact study.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 73

    Airspace, Prohibited areas, Restricted areas.

The Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 73 as follows:

PART 73--SPECIAL USE AIRSPACE

0
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 73 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.  73.22  [Amended]

0
2. Section 73.22 is amended as follows:
* * * * *

R-2204 Oliktok Point High, AK [Amended]

    By removing the current using agency and adding the following in
its place:
    Using Agency. U.S. Department of Energy, Arctic Energy Office,
Washington, DC.
* * * * *

R-2204 Oliktok Point Low, AK [Amended]

    By removing the current using agency and adding the following in
its place:
    Using Agency. U.S. Department of Energy, Arctic Energy Office,
Washington, DC.
* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, on February 6, 2023.
Brian Konie,
Acting Manager, Airspace Rules and Regulations.
[FR Doc. 2023-02822 Filed 2-9-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P