[Federal Register: March 5, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 44)]
[Notices]
[Page 11940-11941]
[DOCID:fr05mr08-95]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2008-0109]

Merchant Marine Personnel Advisory Committee; Meetings

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of meetings.

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

SUMMARY: The Merchant Marine Personnel Advisory Committee (MERPAC) will
meet in Dania Beach, FL, to discuss various issues relating to the
training and fitness of merchant marine personnel. These meetings will
be open to the public.

DATES: A working group of MERPAC will meet on Tuesday, April 8th, 2008
from 8 a.m. until 4 p.m. The full MERPAC Committee will meet on
Wednesday, April 9th and Thursday,

April 10th, 2008 from 8 a.m. until 4 p.m. These meetings may close
early if all business is finished. Written material and requests to
make oral presentations should reach the Coast Guard on or before March
26, 2008. Requests to have a copy of your material distributed to each
member of the committee or subcommittee should reach the Coast Guard on
or before March 26, 2008.

ADDRESSES: The working group will meet in Room 217 of the RTM STAR
Center, 2 West Dixie Highway, Dania Beach, FL. The full Committee will
likewise meet in Room 217 of the RTM STAR Center. Send written material
and requests to make oral presentations to Captain Michael Blair,
Executive Director of MERPAC, Commandant (CG-5221, U.S. Coast Guard,
2100 Second St., SW., Washington, DC 20593-0001). This notice is
available in our online docket, USCG-2008-0109, at http://
www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Mark Gould, Assistant to the
Executive Director of MERPAC; at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice of this meeting is given under the
Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (Pub. L. 92-463).

Agenda of Meeting

    The agenda for the April 8th, 2008, work group meeting of MERPAC is
as follows:
    (1) Discuss Task Statement 68, concerning a review of the draft
Navigation and Vessel Inspection Circular entitled, ``Medical and
Physical Evaluation Guidelines for Merchant Mariner Credentials''; and
    (2) Discuss Task Statement 69, concerning revisions to forms CG-
719K, Merchant Mariner Physical Examination Report, and CG-719K/E,
Merchant Marine Certification of Fitness.
    The agenda for the April 9th, 2008 meeting of MERPAC is as follows:
    (1) The full committee will meet to discuss the objectives for the
meeting. Working groups addressing the following task statements may
meet to deliberate: Task Statement 30, concerning ``Utilizing Military
Sea Service for STCW Certifications''; Task Statement 55, concerning
``Recommendations to Develop a Voluntary Training Program For Deck and
Engine Department Entry Level Mariners on Domestic and Seagoing
Vessels''; Task Statement 58, concerning ``Stakeholder Communications
During MLD Program Restructuring and Centralization''; Task Statement
61, concerning ``Merchant Mariner Medical Waiver Evaluation
Guidelines''; Task Statement 68, concerning ``Medical and Physical
Evaluation Guidelines for Merchant Mariner Credentials''; and Task
Statement 69, concerning ``Revisions to forms CG-719K, Merchant Mariner
Physical Examination Report, and CG-719K/E, Merchant Marine
Certification of Fitness.''
    New working groups may be formed to address issues proposed by the
Coast Guard, MERPAC members, or the public. At the end of the day, the
working groups will make a report to the full committee on what has
been accomplished in their meetings. No action will be taken on these
reports on this date.
    The agenda for the April 10th, 2008 meeting of MERPAC is as
follows:
    (1) Introduction;
    (2) Working Groups' Reports; and
    (3) Other items which may be discussed:
    (a) Standing Committee-Prevention Through People.
    (b) Briefings concerning on-going projects of interest to MERPAC.
    (c) Other items brought up for discussion by the Committee or the
public.

Procedural

    All meetings are open to the public. Please note that the meetings
may close early if all business is finished. At the Chair's discretion,
members of the public may make oral presentations during the meetings.
If you would like to make an oral presentation at a meeting, please
notify the Executive Director no later than March 26, 2008. Written
material for distribution at a meeting should reach the Coast Guard no
later than March 26, 2008. If you would like a copy of your material
distributed to each member of the committee or subcommittee in advance
of a meeting, please submit 25 copies to the Executive Director no
later than March 26, 2008.

Information on Services for Individuals with Disabilities

    For information on facilities or services for individuals with
disabilities or to request special assistance at the meetings, contact
the Executive Director as soon as possible.

    Dated: February 25, 2008.
H.L. Hime,
Acting Director of Commercial Regulations and Standards.
[FR Doc. E8-4196 Filed 3-4-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 150 (Wednesday, August 5, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46573-46574]
[FR Doc No: 2015-19206]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Notice of Commissioner and Staff Attendance at North American
Electric Reliability Corporation Meetings

    The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) hereby gives
notice that members of the Commission and/or Commission staff may
attend the following meetings:

North American Electric Reliability Corporation, Member Representatives
Committee and Board of Trustees Meetings, Board of Trustees Corporate
Governance and Human Resources Committee, Finance and Audit Committee,
Compliance Committee, and Standards Oversight and Technology Committee
Meetings

The Ritz Carlton Toronto, 181 Wellington Street West, Toronto, ON M5V
3G7

August 12 (7:30 a.m.-5:00 p.m.) and August 13 (8:30 a.m.-12:00 p.m.),
2015

    Further information regarding these meetings may be found at:
http://www.nerc.com/Pages/Calendar.aspx.
    The discussions at the meetings, which are open to the public, may
address matters at issue in the following Commission proceedings:

Docket No. RR15-4, North American Electric Reliability Corporation
Docket No. RR15-12, North American Electric Reliability Corporation
Docket Nos. RD14-14, RD15-3, RD15-5, North American Electric
Reliability Corporation

    For further information, please contact Jonathan First, 202-502-
8529, or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: July 30, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-19206 Filed 8-4-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 23 (Friday, February 3, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 5387-5389]
[FR Doc No: 2012-2465]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Bureau of Industry and Security

15 CFR Part 744

[Docket No. 110718395-1482-01]
RIN 0694-AF30

Amendment to the Export Administration Regulations: Addition of a
Reference to a Provision of the Iran Sanctions Act of 1996 (ISA) and
Statement of the Licensing Policy for Transactions Involving Persons
Sanctioned Under the ISA

AGENCY: Bureau of Industry and Security, Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this rule, the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) amends
the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) to add a reference to the
Iran Sanctions Act of 1996 (ISA), which states BIS's licensing policy
for export and reexport transactions that involve persons sanctioned
pursuant to certain enumerated statutes. In this rule, BIS provides
notice to the public that it has a general policy of denial for export
and reexport license applications in which a person sanctioned by the
State Department under the ISA is a party to the transaction. BIS also
makes technical corrections to enhance clarity and consistency.

DATES: This rule is effective February 3, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Theodore Curtin, Sr. Export Policy
Analyst, Foreign Policy Controls Division, Bureau of Industry and
Security, Department of Commerce, by telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or by
email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Basis of Amendment

    The Iran Sanctions Act of 1996 (50 U.S.C. 1701 note) (ISA) requires
the President to sanction persons determined to have engaged in certain
actions that help Iran develop petroleum resources, produce refined
petroleum resources, or acquire refined petroleum products. Sanctions
must also be imposed, pursuant to the ISA, on persons determined to
have taken certain actions to help Iran acquire or develop certain
weapons of mass destruction, missiles, or advanced conventional
weapons. In a September 23, 2010 Presidential Memorandum, the President
delegated the authority to impose sanctions under the ISA to the
Secretary of State.

    Pursuant to that delegation, the State Department makes a
determination whether to impose sanctions. Guidance on sanctions
imposed by the Secretary of State under the ISA is available at http://www.state.gov/e/eeb/esc/iransanctions/. Exporters should contact the
Department of State directly if they have questions about ISA-related
sanctions.
    Upon making its determination, the State Department publishes in
the Federal Register notices of the imposition of sanctions under the
ISA. There are several possible sanctions that may be imposed under the
ISA including a prohibition implemented by BIS on the issuance by the
U.S. Government of a specific license or other specific permission or
authority to export goods or technology to a sanctioned person under
the Export Administration Act of 1979, as amended (50 U.S.C. App.
Sec. Sec.  2401-2420).

Amendment to the EAR: Addition of a Reference to the ISA

    This rule amends the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) at 15
CFR 744.19 to state that, consistent with the sanctions programs
described in Section 744.19(a), (b), and (c), BIS will apply a policy
of denial when reviewing export or reexport license applications in
which a person sanctioned under the ISA is a party to the transaction.
Currently, Section 744.19 of the EAR states that BIS's policy is to
deny export or reexport license applications if a person who is a party
to the transaction (i.e., the applicant, other party authorized to
receive the license, purchaser, intermediate consignee, ultimate
consignee, or end user) is subject to a sanction issued pursuant to one
of three statutory authorities: (1) The Iran-Iraq Arms Nonproliferation
Act of 1992 (Pub. L. 102-484); (2) the Iran, North Korea, and Syria
Nonproliferation Act (Pub. L. 106-178); or (3) Section 11B(b)(1)(B)(i)
or (ii) of the Export Administration Act of 1979, as amended (50 U.S.C.
App. Sec. Sec.  2401-2420). In this rule, BIS amends Section 744.19 to
add a reference to a fourth statute, the ISA.
    Also, this rule clarifies in Section 744.19 that the policy of
denial applies to any person sanctioned under one of the four statutes
who is a party to the transaction (i.e., the applicant, other party
authorized to receive a license, purchaser, intermediate consignee,
ultimate consignee, or end-user). To make this clarification, this rule
replaces the term ``entity'' that previously appeared in Section 744.19
of the EAR with ``person'' in order to be consistent with the four
statutes and BIS's licensing policy under the EAR. As defined in the
EAR, the term ``person'' applies to both natural persons and entities
such as corporations and organizations.
    Also, in this rule, BIS makes technical corrections to Section
744.19 of the EAR to update statutory citations and make conforming
changes. This rule updates the reference to the Iran Nonproliferation
Act of 2000, which has been amended on several occasions and is
currently referred to as the Iran, North Korea, and Syria
Nonproliferation Act, adds the U.S. Code citation for the Iran
Nonproliferation Act of 2000, and amends the citations for the statutes
referenced in Section 744.19(a), (b), and (c) to refer solely to the
U.S. Code citations.
    Since August 21, 2001, the Export Administration Act of 1979, as
amended, has been in lapse and the President, through Executive Order
13222 of August 17, 2001 (3 CFR, 2001 Comp. 783 (2002)), as extended
most recently by the Notice of August 12, 2011 (76 FR 50661 (August 16,
2011)), has continued the EAR in effect under the International
Emergency Economic Powers Act. BIS continues to carry out the
provisions of the Export Administration Act of 1979, as amended, as
appropriate and to the extent permitted by law, pursuant to Executive
Order 13222.

Rulemaking Requirements

    1. Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 direct agencies to assess all
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive
Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and
benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. This rule has been determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
    2. Notwithstanding any other provisions of law, no person is
required to respond to or be subject to a penalty for failure to comply
with a collection of information, subject to the requirements of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) (PRA), unless
that collection of information displays a currently valid Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) Control Number. This rule involves a
collection of information subject to the PRA. This collection has been
approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number
0694-0088, ``Multi-Purpose Application,'' which carries a burden hour
estimate of 58 minutes to prepare and submit form BIS-748. Total burden
hours associated with the PRA and OMB control number 0694-0088 are not
expected to increase as a result of this rule.
    3. This rule does not contain policies with Federalism implications
as that term is defined under Executive Order 13132.
    4. The provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C.
553) requiring notice of proposed rulemaking, the opportunity for
public participation, and a delay in effective date, are inapplicable
because this regulation involves a military or foreign affairs function
of the United States (see 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1)). Further, no other law
requires that a notice of proposed rulemaking and an opportunity for
public comment be given for this rule. Because a notice of proposed
rulemaking and an opportunity for public comment are not required to be
given for this rule by 5 U.S.C. 553, or by any other law, the
analytical requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601
et seq.) are not applicable. Therefore, this rule is issued in final
form.

List of Subjects in 15 CFR Part 744

    Exports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Terrorism.

    Accordingly, part 744 of the Export Administration Regulations (15
CFR Parts 730-774) is amended as follows:

PART 744--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for 15 CFR Part 744 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority: Et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 2139a; 22 U.S.C. 7201 et seq.; 22
U.S.C. 7210; E.O. 12058, 43 FR 20947, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 179;
E.O. 12851, 58 FR 33181, 3 CFR, 1993 Comp., p. 608; E.O. 12938, 59
FR 59099, 3 CFR, 1994 Comp., p. 950; E.O. 12947, 60 FR 5079, 3 CFR,
1995 Comp., p. 356; E.O. 13026, 61 FR 58767, 3 CFR, 1996 Comp., p.
228; E.O. 13099, 63 FR 45167, 3 CFR, 1998 Comp., p. 208; E.O. 13222,
66 FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; E.O. 13224, 66 FR 49079, 3
CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 786; Notice of January 13, 2011, 76 FR 3009
(January 18, 2011); Notice of August 12, 2011, 76 FR 50661 (August
16, 2011); Notice of November 9, 2011, 76 FR 70319 (November 10,
2011).

0
2. Revise Sec.  744.19 to read as follows:

Sec.  744.19  Licensing Policy Regarding Persons Sanctioned Pursuant to
Specified Statutes.

    Notwithstanding any other licensing policy elsewhere in the EAR,
BIS will deny any export or reexport license application if any person
who is a party

to the transaction (i.e., the applicant, other party authorized to
receive a license, purchaser, intermediate consignee, ultimate
consignee, or end-user) is subject to one or more of the sanctions
described in paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and (e) of this section and will
deny any export or reexport license application for an item listed on
the Commerce Control List with a reason for control of MT if a person
who is a party to the transaction is subject to a sanction described in
paragraph (d) of this section.
    (a) A sanction issued pursuant to the Iran-Iraq Arms
Nonproliferation Act of 1992 (50 U.S.C. 1701 note) that prohibits the
issuance of any license to or by the sanctioned person.
    (b) A sanction issued pursuant to the Iran, North Korea, and Syria
Nonproliferation Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 note) that prohibits the granting
of a license and requires the suspension of an existing license for the
transfer to foreign persons of items, the export of which is controlled
under the Export Administration Act of 1979, as amended (50 U.S.C. app.
2401-2420), or the Export Administration Regulations.
    (c) A sanction issued pursuant to section 11B(b)(1)(B)(ii) of the
Export Administration Act of 1979, as amended (50 U.S.C. app. 2401-
2420), that prohibits the issuance of new licenses for exports to the
sanctioned person of items controlled pursuant to the Export
Administration Act of 1979, as amended.
    (d) A sanction issued pursuant to section 11B(b)(1)(B)(i) of the
Export Administration Act of 1979, as amended (50 U.S.C. app. 2401-
2420), that prohibits the issuance of new licenses for exports to the
sanctioned person of MTCR Annex equipment or technology controlled
pursuant to the Export Administration Act of 1979, as amended.
    (e) A sanction issued pursuant to the Iran Sanctions Act of 1996
(50 U.S.C. 1701 note) that prohibits the issuance of a specific license
or grant of any other specific permission or authority to export any
goods or technology to a sanctioned person under the Export
Administration Act of 1979, as amended (50 U.S.C. app. 2401-2420).

    Dated: January 30, 2012.
Kevin J. Wolf,
Assistant Secretary for Export Administration.
[FR Doc. 2012-2465 Filed 2-2-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-33-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 132 (Monday, July 11, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44902-44903]
[FR Doc No: 2016-16269]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-78225; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2016-072]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Designation of a Longer Period for Commission Action on a
Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1 Thereto, Relating
to the Listing and Trading of the Shares of the Amplify Dow Theory
Forecasts Buy List ETF of Amplify ETF Trust

July 5, 2016.
    On May 10, 2016, the NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant
to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'')
\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to list and
trade shares of the Amplify Dow Theory Forecasts Buy List ETF of
Amplify ETF Trust. On May 20, 2016, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1
to the proposed rule change. The proposed rule change, as modified by
Amendment No. 1, was published for comment in the Federal Register on
May 31, 2016.\3\ The Commission received no comment letters on the
proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 77890 (May 24,
2016), 81 FR 34419.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act \4\ provides that, within 45 days of
the publication of notice of the filing of a proposed rule change, or
within such longer period up to 90 days as the Commission may designate
if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its
reasons for so finding or as to which the self-regulatory organization
consents, the Commission shall either approve the proposed rule change,
disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. The
45th day after publication of the notice for this proposed rule change
is July 15, 2016.

The Commission is extending this 45-day time period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Commission finds that it is appropriate to designate a longer
period within which to take action on the proposed rule change so that
it has sufficient time to consider the proposed rule change.
Accordingly, the Commission, pursuant to section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\5\ designates August 29, 2016, as the date by which the Commission
should either approve or disapprove or institute proceedings to
determine whether to disapprove the proposed rule change (File Number
SR-NASDAQ-2016-072), as modified by Amendment No. 1 thereto.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(31).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-16269 Filed 7-8-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 17 (Wednesday, January 26, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4075-4076]
[FR Doc No: 2022-01458]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-94010; File No. SR-CboeBZX-2021-078]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Designation of a Longer Period for Commission Action on a Proposed Rule
Change To Introduce a New Data Product To Be Known as the Short Volume
Report

January 20, 2022.
    On November 17, 2021, Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant
to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'')
\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to amend
Exchange Rule 11.22(f) to introduce a new data product to be known as
the Short Volume Report. The proposed rule change was published in the
Federal Register on December 7, 2021.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C.78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 93688 (December 1,
2021), 86 FR 69319. Comments received on the proposal are available
on the Commission's website at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-cboebzx-2021-078/srcboebzx2021078.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act \4\ provides that within 45 days of the
publication of notice of the filing of a proposed rule change, or
within such longer period up

to 90 days as the Commission may designate if it finds such longer
period to be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding, or
as to which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission
will either approve the proposed rule change, disapprove the proposed
rule change, or institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be disapproved. The 45th day after publication of
the notice for this proposed rule change is January 21, 2022. The
Commission is extending this 45-day time period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Commission finds it appropriate to designate a longer period
within which to take action on the proposed rule change so that it has
sufficient time to consider the proposed rule change. Accordingly, the
Commission, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\5\ designates
March 7, 2022 as the date by which the Commission shall either approve
or disapprove, or institute proceedings to determine whether to
disapprove, the proposed rule change (File No. SR-CboeBZX-2021-078).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Id.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(31).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-01458 Filed 1-25-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


4/ 7/ 04 1 FIFRA SAP April 1  2, 2004 4/ 7/ 04 2 Overview ° Context  Objectives of Level II RRA  Architecture of Aquatic Level II RRA Pilot model ( Version 1.0)

° Proposed exposure model changes Version 2.0 ° Implementation and Next Steps ( Version 2.1, etc.) 4/ 7/ 04 3 General Assessment Endpoint ° Survival, growth, and/ or reproduction of aquatic organisms for assessment of populations that are located adjacent to the edge of a treated field 4/ 7/ 04 4 Objectives ° Provide estimates of likelihood and magnitude of effect using data available for a Level I risk assessment ° Identify regional/ cropping patterns or effects refinement ( Level III), mitigation 4/ 7/ 04 5 Ecological Exposure Modeling Scenario  Version 1.0 ° Small but permanent water body ° Location edge of a treated field ° All runoff from treated field is routed to the water body ° Fixed volume standing water  Assumption: runoff + precipitation =

evaporation  Calendar month averages for meteorologically dependent properties 4/ 7/ 04 6 Ecological Exposure Modeling Scenario  Version 1.0 ° Small but permanent water body ° Location edge of a treated field ° All runoff from treated field is routed to the water body ° Fixed volume standing water  Assumption: runoff + precipitation =

evaporation  Calendar month averages for meteorologically dependent properties 4/ 7/ 04 7 Ecological Exposure Modeling Scenario  Version 2.0 ° Small but permanent water body ° Location edge of a treated field ° All runoff from treated field is routed to the water body ° Varying volume standing water  Water source  runoff + precipitation  Daily volume variation  runoff +

precipitation  evaporation  overflow  Daily averages for meteorologicallydependent properties 4/ 7/ 04 8 Aquatic Version 1.0 Model Components  Acute EXPOSURE ° Model   PRZM/ EXAMS ° Mixed Empirical Distribution Function ( annual instantaneous peaks) TOXICITY ° Species Sensitivity Distribution ( 5th, 50th, 95th generic species)

° Concentration response Curve ( Probit)

RISK Two Dimension Monte Carlo Analysis 4/ 7/ 04 9 Aquatic Version 2.0 Model Components  Acute EXPOSURE ° Model   PRZM/ VVWM ° Mixed Empirical Distribution Function ( annual instantaneous peaks) TOXICITY ° Species Sensitivity Distribution ( 5th, 50th, 95th generic species)

° Concentration response Curve ( Probit)

RISK Two Dimension Monte Carlo Analysis 4/ 7/ 04 10 " Standard" Surface Water Body and Field Size Dimensions Treated Field Drainage Area ( DA)  10 ha Surface Area 1 ha Depth 2 meters Relationship based on DA/ VC 1.5 acres/ acre ft ( 5 m2/ m3)

Volume Capacity ( VC)

20,000 m3 4/ 7/ 04 11 Proposed Exposure Model Modifications ° Varying volume surface water model body to replace fixed volume ° Incorporate daily variations in meteorologically dependent properties ° Adopt crop scenario specific drainage area and water body sizes


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 175 (Thursday, September 10, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 54418]
[FR Doc No: 2015-22779]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Parts 154, 155, and 156

46 CFR Parts 35 and 39

[USCG-1999-5150]
RIN 1625-AB37

Marine Vapor Control Systems

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule; information collection approval.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard announces that the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has approved the amendment of an existing collection of
information, as requested by the Coast Guard and described in the final
rule published on July 16, 2013. The final rule revised safety
regulations for facility and vessel vapor control systems (VCSs) to
promote safe VCS operation in an expanded range of activities now
subject to current Federal and State environmental requirements,
reflect industry advances in VCS technology, and codify the standards
for the design and operation of a VCS at tank barge cleaning
facilities. The revised regulations increase operational safety by
regulating the design, installation, and use of VCSs, but they do not
require anyone to install or use VCSs. The OMB must approve any
regulatory provisions that constitute a collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act, before an agency can enforce those
provisions. Having received OMB's approval, the Coast Guard will now
enforce collection of information requirements in the final rule. This
rulemaking promotes the Coast Guard's maritime safety and stewardship
missions.

DATES: The collection of information requirements contained in the July
16, 2013 final rule (78 FR 42596) and approved by the OMB as an
amendment to existing collection of information, control number 1625-
0060, will be enforced beginning September 10, 2015. The requirements
include provisions for VCS certifications, recertifications, periodic
operational reviews, approval requests, reviews of operating manuals,
failure analyses, operational review letters, and relabeling. These
requirements aid the Coast Guard and industry in ensuring industry's
regulatory compliance and safe practices in connection with VCSs.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information about this document,
call or email Dr. Cynthia Znati, Office of Design and Engineering
Standards, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For information about viewing or submitting
material to the docket, call Cheryl Collins, Program Manager, Docket
Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, toll free 1-800-647-5527.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard's final rule, 78 FR 42596
(July 16, 2013), contained information collection provisions that
cannot be enforced against any member of the public until OMB approves
those provisions and assigns one or more OMB control numbers. The OMB
has now approved those provisions and assigned OMB Control Number 1625-
0060, and the Coast Guard will enforce them beginning September 10,
2015.
    Documents mentioned in this document are in our online docket for
USCG-1999-5150 at http://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by
following the Web site's instructions. You can also view the docket
online at the Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001 between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    This document is issued under authority of 5 U.S.C. 552(a).

    Dated: September 3, 2015.
J.G. Lantz,
Director of Commercial Regulations and Standards, U.S. Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. 2015-22779 Filed 9-9-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


  MacroButton macIb01 i

EPA REGISTRATION DIVISION COMPANY NOTICE OF FILING FOR PESTICIDE
PETITIONS PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER

EPA Registration Division contact: [Shaja Joyner, PM-20,<PHONE_NUMBER>]

INSTRUCTIONS:  Please utilize this outline in preparing the pesticide
petition. In cases where the outline element does not apply, please
insert “NA-Remove” and maintain the outline. Please do not change
the margins, font, or format in your pesticide petition. Simply replace
the instructions that appear in green, i.e., “[insert company
name],” with the information specific to your action.

TEMPLATE:

[BASF Corporation]

[Insert petition number]

	EPA has received a pesticide petition ([insert petition number]) from
[BASF Corporation], [P.O. Box 13528, Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina, 27709] requesting, pursuant to section 408(d) of the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d), to amend 40 CFR
part 180 by establishing a tolerance for residues of [Dimethomorph (BAS
550 F)
[(E,Z)4-[3-(4-chlorophenyl)-3-(3,4-dimethoxyphenyl)-1-oxo-2-propenyl]-mo
rpholine] its metabolites and degradates] in or on the raw agricultural
commodity [strawberry] at [1.0] parts per million (ppm) and to amend 40
CFR part 180 b [replacing] a tolerance for residues of [Dimethomorph
(BAS 550 F)
[(E,Z)4-[3-(4-chlorophenyl)-3-(3,4-dimethoxyphenyl)-1-oxo-2-propenyl]-mo
rpholine] its metabolites and degradates] in or on the raw agricultural
commodity [lettuce, head] from [10] ppm and [lettuce, leaf] at [10] ppm
[to 30 ppm].  EPA has determined that the petition contains data or
information regarding the elements set forth in section 408 (d)(2) of
FDDCA; however, EPA has not fully evaluated the sufficiency of the
submitted data at this time or whether the data supports granting of the
petition. Additional data may be needed before EPA rules on the
petition.

A. Residue Chemistry

	1. Plant metabolism. [Based upon the results of metabolism studies
conducted on potato, grape, and lettuce, the nature of the residues in
strawberry is considered to be understood. The results of the potato
metabolism study demonstrated that only negligible total radioactive
residues (TRR) were found in tubers, 0.01-0.02 parts per million (ppm.
This is in contrast to the aerial portions of the plant, which were
found to have up to 23.5 ppm TRR, thus demonstrating that translocation
of dimethomorph downward within the plant was not significant. Almost
all of the radioactive residue (97.8%) was extractable from the plant at
harvest. In the aerial portion of the plant, approximately 70% of the
TRR was identified as dimethomorph. No metabolites were identified that
require regulation.

The results of the grape metabolism study showed that the TRR in/on
grapes harvested 35 days following the last of four applications [0.8 lb
active ingredient per acre (ai/A) per application for four consecutive
weeks] for a total rate of 3.2 lb ai/A was 14.6 ppm. Unmetabolized
dimethomorph accounted for 87.3% of the TRR (12.7 ppm). No metabolites
were identified that require regulation.

The results of the lettuce metabolism study showed that the TRR in/on
lettuce leaves harvested 4 days following the last of 4 applications
[approximately 1.0 lb ai/A per application with a 9 to 11 day spray
interval], for a total rate of 4.1 lb ai/A, was 102 ppm. Of this total
residue, 98.5% was extractable and unmetabolized dimethomorph accounted
for greater than 93% of the extractable TRR. No metabolites were
identified that require regulation.

Since the metabolism between the three representative crops is not
different, these metabolism studies are considered to be adequate to
understand the nature of the residue in diverse crop groups and as such,
an additional metabolism study in strawberries is not required.]

	2. Analytical method. [A reliable method for the determination of
dimethomorph residues in plant matrices exists. The determination of the
dimethomorph residues in strawberries was performed according to the
analytical BASF Method No. L0013, Method for the determination of
geometric isomers of BAS 550 F. The final determination of BAS 550 F was
performed by LC-MS/MS at a LOQ of 0.005 mg/kg. The method has been
validated in the context of this residue study.]

	3. Magnitude of residues. [Supervised field trials were carried out to
determine the magnitude of the residue in/on strawberries. The number
and locations of field trials are in accordance with OCSPP Guideline
860.1500 and Directive 98-02, Section 9. Eight field trials were
conducted encompassing Regions 1 (PA; 1 trial), 2 (AL; 1 trial), 3 (FL;
1 trial), 5 (WI; 1 trial), 10 (CA; 3 trials) and 12 (OR; 1 trial) during
the 2013 growing season. The treated plot at each site received 3
applications of dimethomorph at a rate of 0.2 lb ai/A for a total
seasonal rate of 0.6 lb ai/A with a PHI of 0 days after the last
application. Detected residues of Dimethomorph in strawberries support
the proposed tolerance.]

B. Toxicological Profile

Acute toxicity.

[i. Oral LD50 studies were conducted on dimethomorph technical:

An acute oral toxicity study in the Sprague-Dawley rat for dimethomorph
technical with a LD50 of 4,300 milligrams/kilogram body weight (mg/kg
b.w.) for males and 3,500 mg/kg b.w. for females. Based upon EPA
toxicity criteria, the acute oral toxicity category for dimethomorph
technical is Category III or slightly toxic.

An acute toxicity study in the CD-1 mouse for dimethomorph technical
with a LD50 of greater than 5000 mg/kg b.w. for males and 3699
mg/kg/b.w. for females. Based on the EPA toxicity category criteria, the
acute oral toxicity category for dimethomorph technical is Category III
or slightly toxic.

ii. Oral LD50 studies were conducted on the two isomers (E and Z) alone:

An acute oral toxicity study in the Wistar rat for the E-isomer with a
LD50 greater than 5,000 mg/kg b.w. for males and approximately 5,000
mg/kg b.w. for females.

An acute oral toxicity study in the Wistar rat for the Z-isomer with a
LD50 greater than 5,000 mg/kg b.w. for both males and females.

iii. An acute dermal toxicity study in the Wistar rat for dimethomorph
technical with a dermal LD50 greater than 5,000 mg/kg b.w. for both
males and females. Based on the EPA toxicity category criteria, the
acute dermal toxicity category for dimethomorph is Category IV or
relatively non-toxic.

iv. A 4-hour inhalation study in Wistar rats for dimethomorph technical
with a LC50 greater than 4.2 mg/L for both males and females. Based on
the EPA toxicity category criteria, the acute inhalation toxicity
category for dimethomorph technical is Category IV or relatively
non-toxic.

v. A skin irritation study was performed using New Zealand White
rabbits. Based on the EPA toxicity criteria, the skin irritation
toxicity category for dimethomorph technical in this study is Category
IV or non-to-slightly irritating.

vi. An eye irritation study using New Zealand White rabbits demonstrated
dimethomorph technical produced moderate conjunctival redness, slight to
moderate chemosis and slight discharge three hours after treatment.
Based on the EPA toxicity criteria, the eye irritation category for
dimethomorph technical is Category III (slightly-to-moderately
irritating).]

	2. Genotoxicty.

[i. Salmonella reverse gene mutation assays (2 studies) were negative up
to a limit dose of 5,000 (g/plate. Chinese hamster lung V79 cells were
negative for mutations at the HGPRT locus at up to cytotoxic doses in
two studies.

ii. Structural Chromosomal Aberration studies were presumptively weakly
positive in human lymphocytic cultures, but only in S9 activated
cultures treated at 422 (g/ml, the highest dose tested (HDT), which was
strongly cytotoxic. No increase in chromosomal aberrations was observed
in the absence of S9 activation at all doses. Furthermore, the positive
clastogenic response observed under the in vitro conditions was not
confirmed in two in vivo micronucleus assays.

iii. Micronucleus assay (2 studies) indicated that dimethomorph was
negative for inducing micronuclei in bone marrow cells of mice following
i.p. administration of doses up to 200 mg/kg or oral doses up to the
limit dose of 5,000 mg/kg. Thus, dimethomorph was found to be negative
in these studies for causing cytogenetic damage in vivo.

iv. Dimethomorph was negative for transformation in Syrian hamster
embryo cells treated, in the presence and absence of activation, up to
cytotoxic concentrations (265 (g/ml/+S9; 50 (g/ml/-S9).]

	3. Reproductive and developmental toxicity.

[i. A rat developmental toxicity study with a Lowest-Observed-Effect
Level (LOEL) for maternal toxicity of 160 mg/kg/day and a
No-Observed-Effect Level (NOEL) for maternal toxicity of 60 mg/kg/day.
The NOEL for developmental toxicity is 60 mg/kg/day. Dimethomorph is not
teratogenic in the Sprague-Dawley rat.

ii. A rabbit development toxicity study with a LOEL for maternal
toxicity of 650 mg/kg/day and a NOEL for maternal toxicity of 300
mg/kg/day. The NOEL for developmental toxicity is 650 mg/kg/day, the
highest dose tested. Dimethomorph is not teratogenic in the New Zealand
white rabbit.

iii. A two-generation rat reproduction study with a LOEL for parental
systemic toxicity of 1000 ppm, or approximately 80 mg/kg/day, and a NOEL
for parental systemic toxicity of 300 ppm, or approximately 24
mg/kg/day. The NOEL for fertility and reproductive function was 1000
ppm, the highest concentration tested, or approximately 80 mg/kg
b.w./day.]

	4. Subchronic toxicity.

[i. A 90-day dietary study in Sprague-Dawley rats with a NOEL of greater
than or equal to 1000 ppm, the highest concentration tested, or
approximately 73 mg/kg/day for males and 82 mg/kg/day for females.

ii. A 90-day dog dietary study with a NOEL of 450 ppm, or approximately
15 mg/kg/day, and a LOEL of 1350 ppm, or approximately 43 mg/kg/day.]

	5. Chronic toxicity.

[i. A 2-year chronic toxicity study in Sprague-Dawley rats with a NOEL
of 150 ppm or approximately 9.4 mg/kg/day for males and 11.9 mg/kg/day
for females. The LOEL for systemic toxicity is 450 ppm, or approximately
36.2 mg/kg/day for males and 57.7 mg/kg/day for females.

ii. A 1-year chronic toxicity study in dogs with a NOEL of 450 ppm, or
approximately 14.7 mg/kg/day and a LOEL of 1350 ppm, or approximately
44.6 mg/kg/day.

iii. A 2-year oncogenicity study in Sprague-Dawley rats with a NOEL for
systemic toxicity of 200 ppm, or approximately 8.8 mg/kg/day for males
and 11.3 mg/kg/day for females. The LOEL for systemic toxicity was 750
ppm, or approximately 33.9 mg/kg/day for males and 46.3 mg/kg/day for
females. There was no evidence of increased incidence of neoplastic
lesions in treated animals. The NOEL for oncogenicity is 2000 ppm, the
highest concentration tested, or approximately 94.6 mg/kg/day for males
and 132.5 mg/kg/day for females.

iv. A 2-year oncogenicity study in CD-1 mice with a NOEL for systemic
toxicity of 100 mg/kg/day and a LOEL of 1,000 mg/kg/day. There was no
evidence of increased incidence of neoplastic lesions in treated
animals. The NOEL for oncogenicity is 1,000 mg/kg/day, the highest dose
tested.

v. A subchronic neurotoxicity study in Wistar rats with a NOEL of 432.9
mg/kg/day in males or 510.1 mg/kg/day in females. There was no evidence
of neurotoxicity.

vi. A subchronic immunotoxicity study in male Wistar rats with a NOEL of
2400 ppm, equivalent to 184 mg/kg/day 432.9 mg/kg/day. There was no
evidence of an immunotoxic potential.]

	6. Animal metabolism. [Results from the livestock and rat metabolism
studies show that orally administered dimethomorph was rapidly excreted
by the animals. The principal route of elimination is via the feces.]

	7. Metabolite toxicology. [There were no metabolites identified in
plant or animal commodities which require regulation.]

	8. Endocrine disruption. [Collective organ weights and
histopathological findings from the two-generation reproduction study in
rats, as well as from the subchronic and chronic toxicity studies in two
or more animal species, demonstrate no apparent estrogenic effects or
effects on the endocrine system. There is no information available that
suggests that dimethomorph technical would be associated with endocrine
effects.]

C. Aggregate Exposure

	1. Dietary exposure. [An assessment was conducted to evaluate the
potential risk due to chronic dietary exposure of the U.S. population
and sub-populations to residues of dimethomorph. This analysis included
all currently proposed tolerances listed in U.S. 40 CFR § 180.493 and
the proposed tolerance for strawberry at 1.0 ppm.]

	i. Food. [Acute Dietary Exposure Assessment

An acute assessment was not needed since the U.S. EPA Toxicological
Endpoint Selection (TES) Committees had previously evaluated the
dimethomorph toxicity data, and determined there was no toxicological
endpoint attributable to a single dose and a quantitative acute dietary
exposure and risk assessment are not required.

Chronic Dietary Exposure Assessment

A Tier 1 chronic dietary exposure assessment was conducted assuming
tolerance level residues and 100% crop treated factors for all
registered crops and the proposed new use for strawberry. The EPA Food
Commodity Ingredient Database (FCID) was also used in Exponent's Dietary
Exposure Evaluation Module (DEEM-FCID) software. Tolerances for animal
commodities (i.e. meat, meat byproducts, milk, eggs) are not required
since metabolism studies have shown dimethomorph residues will not occur
in animal commodities from the consumption of dimethomorph residues in
livestock feed. Furthermore, there are no livestock feedstuffs
associated with strawberry. Therefore, dimethomorph tolerances for
residues in animal commodities do not need to be established.

Dietary exposure estimates (food + drinking water) were compared against
the established dimethomorph chronic Population Adjusted Dose (cPAD) of
0.11 mg/kg b.w./day for all populations. Results of the chronic dietary
assessments are listed in the table below. The estimated chronic dietary
exposure from crops (both established and proposed tolerances) was less
than 25% of the cPAD for all subpopulations (Table 1). Additional
refinements such as the use of anticipated residues and crop treatment
factors would further reduce the estimated chronic dietary exposure. The
results in the Table below demonstrate that there are no risk concerns
for any subpopulation based on established and new strawberry, and that
the results clearly meet the FQPA standard of reasonable certainty of no
harm.

Table 1. Summary of Chronic Dietary Exposure Assessment considering
crops with established and proposed tolerances for Dimethomorph and
drinking water.

Population sub-group	Chronic Exposure (mg/kg bw/day)	%cPAD

US Population	0.012933	11.8

All infants (< 1 year)	0.010746	9.8

Children 1-2	0.026544	24.1

Children 3-5	0.022276	20.3

Children 6-12	0.012695	11.5

Youth 13-19	0.008745	8.0

Adults 20-49	0.012406	11.3

Adults 50+ yrs	0.012718	11.6

Females 13 - 49 yrs	0.01202	10.9

]

	ii. Drinking water. [The chronic drinking water values used in this
analysis were the values proposed by EPA, September 15, 2011,
“Dimethomorph: Human Health Risk Assessment to Support Amended Use on
Grapes, Bulb Vegetables, Leafy Brassica Vegetables and Leafy
Vegetables”. The chronic drinking water value used was 24.7 ug/L.

Acute Aggregate Exposure and Risk (Food and water)

The U.S. EPA Toxicological Endpoint Selection (TES) Committees has
evaluated the dimethomorph toxicity data and determined there was no
endpoint attributable to a single dose, therefore an acute aggregate
exposure and risk evaluation is not required.

Chronic Aggregate Exposure and Risk (food and water)

The aggregate chronic risk includes residues of dimethomorph from food
and water. The results in Table 1 demonstrate there are no risk concerns
for any subpopulation based on established and new uses, and that the
results clearly meet the FQPA standard of reasonable certainty of no
harm.]

	2. Non-dietary exposure. [Dimethomorph is not registered for use on any
sites that would result in residential exposure. Therefore, a
residential exposure and risk assessment was not conducted. Also, a
short-term aggregate risk assessment is not required. ]

D. Cumulative Effects

	[There is no information to indicate that any toxic effects produced by
dimethomorph would be cumulative with those of any other chemical. The
fungicidal mode of action of dimethomorph is unique; dimethomorph
inhibits cell wall formation only in Oomycete fungi. The result is lysis
of the cell wall that kills growing cells and inhibits spore formation
in mature hyphae. This unique mode of action and limited pest spectrum
suggest that there is little or no potential for cumulative toxic
effects in mammals. In addition, the toxicity studies submitted to
support this petition do not indicate that dimethomorph is a
particularly toxic compound. No toxic end-points of potential concern
were identified.]

E. Safety Determination

	1. U.S. population. [Based on this risk assessment, BASF concludes that
there is a reasonable certainty that no risk concerns to the general
population from the aggregate exposure to dimethomorph residues.]

	2. Infants and children. [Based on this risk assessment, BASF concludes
that there is a reasonable certainty that no risk concerns to infants or
children from the aggregate exposure to dimethomorph residues.]

F. International Tolerances

	[There are no Canadian, Mexican, or Codex MRLs established for
dimethomorph for strawberry; consequently, a discussion of international
harmonization is not relevant.]

 PAGE

 PAGE   7


[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 122 (Friday, June 26, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30560-30562]
[FR Doc No: E9-15151]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[FERC Docket No. CP09-54-000]

Ruby Pipeline, L.L.C.; Notice of Availability of the Draft
Environmental Impact Statement and Notice of Public Comment Meetings
for the Ruby Pipeline Project

June 19, 2009.
    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or
Commission) has prepared a draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
on the natural gas pipeline facilities proposed by Ruby Pipeline,
L.L.C. (Ruby) in the above-referenced docket. The Ruby Pipeline Project
facilities would be located in Wyoming, Utah, Nevada, and Oregon and
would be capable of transporting up to 1.5 million dekatherms per day
of natural gas.
    The draft EIS was prepared to satisfy the requirements of the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). The U.S. Department
of Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Bureau of Reclamation,
and Fish and Wildlife Service; the U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service (USFS) and Natural Resources Conservation Service; the
U.S. Army

Corps of Engineers; the State of Utah Public Lands Policy Coordination
Office; and the Board of County Commissioners in Lincoln County,
Wyoming are participating 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. The Ruby Pipeline
Project would require permits from the cooperating agencies pursuant to
right-of-way grants (and/or temporary use or special use permits) for
federally administered lands/canals crossed in Wyoming, Utah, Nevada,
and Oregon.
    Based on the analysis included in the EIS, the FERC staff concludes
that construction and operation of the Ruby Pipeline Project would
result in some adverse environmental impacts. However, most of these
would be reduced to less-than-significant levels with the
implementation of Ruby's proposed mitigation measures; additional
measures and agreements being discussed by Ruby and other agencies
related to permitting or conservation agreements; and the additional
measures recommended by staff in the EIS.
    The draft EIS addresses the potential environmental effects of the
following project facilities:
     About 675.2 miles of 42-inch-diameter mainline pipeline;
     About 2.6 miles of 42-inch-diameter lateral pipeline;
     1 electric-powered compressor station and 3 natural gas-
powered compressor stations (totaling 160,500 horsepower of new
compression);
     4 meter stations containing interconnects to other
pipeline systems;
     44 mainline valves;
     20 pig launchers or receivers;
     5 new communication towers; and
     Miscellaneous communications equipment installed at eight
existing communication towers.

Comment Procedures and Public Meetings

    You can make a difference by providing us with your specific
comments or concerns about the Ruby Pipeline Project. Your comments
should focus on the potential environmental effects, reasonable
alternatives, and measures to avoid or lessen environmental impacts.
The more specific your comments, the more useful they will be. To
ensure consideration of your comments on the proposal in the final EIS,
it is important that the Commission receive your comments before August
10, 2009.
    For your convenience, there are four methods in which you can use
to submit your comments to the Commission. In all instances please
reference the project docket number CP09-54-000 with your submission.
The Commission encourages electronic filing of comments and has
dedicated eFiling expert staff available to assist you at (202) 502-
8258 or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please carefully follow these instructions so
that your comments are properly recorded:
    (1) You may file your comments electronically by using the Quick
Comment feature, which is located on the Commission's Internet Web site
at http://www.ferc.gov under the link Documents and Filings. A Quick
Comment is an easy method for interested persons to submit text-only
comments on a project;
    (2) You may file your comments electronically by using the eFiling
feature, which is located on the Commission's Internet Web site at
http://www.ferc.gov under the link to Documents and Filings. eFiling
involves preparing your submission in the same manner as you would if
filing on paper, and then saving the file on your computer's hard
drive. You will attach that file as your submission. New eFiling users
must first create an account by clicking on ``Sign-up'' or
``eRegister.'' You will be asked to select the type of filing your are
making. A comment on a particular project is considered a ``Comment on
a Filing;''
    (3) You may file your comments via mail to the Commission by
sending an original and two copies of your letter to: Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE;
Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426; label one copy of your comments for the
attention of the Gas Branch 1, PJ-11.1 and reference Docket No. CP09-
54-000 on the original and both copies; and
    (4) In lieu of sending written or electronic comments, the FERC
invites you to attend one of the public comment meetings the staff will
conduct in the project area to receive comments on the draft EIS. All
meetings will begin at 7 p.m., local time, and are scheduled as
follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Date                               Location
------------------------------------------------------------------------
July 21, 2009.........................  Malin Community Hall, 2307 Front
                                         Street. Malin, OR 97623.
July 22, 2009.........................  Elks Lodge, 323 N. F Street,
                                         Lakeview, OR 97630.
July 23, 2009.........................  Winnemucca Convention Center, 50
                                         W. Winnemucca Blvd.,
                                         Winnemucca, NV 89445.
July 27, 2009.........................  Brigham City Senior Center, 24 N
                                         300 W, Brigham City, UT 84302.
July 28, 2009.........................  Hilton Garden Inn, 3650 East
                                         Idaho St., Elko, NV 89801.
July 29, 2009.........................  Kemmerer Senior Center, 105 J.C.
                                         Penney Drive, Kemmerer, WY
                                         83101.
July 30, 2009.........................  Hyrum Civic Center, 83 W. Main
                                         St., Hyrum, UT 84319.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Interested groups and individuals are encouraged to attend and
present oral comments on the draft EIS. Transcripts of the meetings
will be prepared.
    After the comments are reviewed, any significant new issues are
investigated, and modifications are made to the draft EIS, a final EIS
will be published and distributed. The final EIS will contain the
staff's responses to timely comments received on the draft EIS.
    Comments will be considered by the Commission but will not serve to
make the commentor a party to the proceeding. 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 385.214). Anyone may intervene in this proceeding
based on the draft EIS. You must file your request to intervene as
specified above.\1\ Only intervenors have the right to seek rehearing
of the Commission's decision. You do not need intervenor status to have
your comments considered.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Interventions may also be filed electronically via the
Internet in lieu of paper. See the previous discussion on filing
comments electronically.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The draft EIS has been placed in the public files of the FERC, BLM,
and USFS and is available for public inspection at:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission     U.S. Bureau of Land  Management             U.S. Forest Service
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Public Reference Room, 888 First      Wyoming State Office, P.O. Box 1828,  Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest,
 Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington,     Cheyenne, WY 82003.                   Ogden Ranger District, 507 25th
 DC 20426,<PHONE_NUMBER>.            Kemmerer Field Office, 312 Highway     Street, Ogden, UT 84401.
                                       189 N, Kemmerer, WY 83101.           Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest,
                                      Utah State Office, 440 West 200        Salt Lake Office, 8256 Federal
                                       South, Suite 500, Salt Lake City,     Building, 125 S. State Street, Salt
                                       UT 84145-0155.                        Lake City, UT 84138.
                                      Salt Lake Field Office, 2370 South    Fremont-Winema National Forest, 1301
                                       2300 West, Salt Lake City, UT         S. G Street, Lakeview, OR 97630.
                                       84119.
                                      Nevada State Office, 1340 Financial   U.S. Forest Service Intermountain
                                       Blvd., Reno, NV 89502.                Regional Office, 324 25th Street,
                                                                             Ogden, UT 84401.
                                      Elko District Office, 3900 E. Idaho
                                       Street, Elko, NV 89801.
                                      Winnemucca District Office, 5100 E.
                                       Winnemucca Blvd., Winnemucca, NV
                                       89445.
                                      Surprise Field Office, 602 Cressler
                                       Street, Cedarville, CA 96104.
                                      Oregon State Office, 333 SW First
                                       Avenue, Portland, OR 97204.
                                      Lakeview Office, 1301 S. G Street,
                                       Lakeview, OR 97630.
                                      Klamath Falls Office, 2795 Anderson
                                       Avenue, Bldg. 25, Klamath
                                       Falls, OR 97603.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A limited number of hard copies and CD-ROMs of the draft EIS are
available from the FERC's Public Reference Room identified above. The
draft EIS is also available for public viewing on the FERC's Internet
Web site at http://www.ferc.gov. In addition, copies of the draft EIS
have been mailed to federal, state, and local government agencies;
elected officials; Native American tribes; local libraries and
newspapers; intervenors in the FERC's proceeding; individuals who
provided scoping comments; affected landowners and individuals who
requested the draft EIS; and new landowners identified as being crossed
by route alternatives either recommended by FERC staff or stuill under
consideration.

Route Alternatives Recommended or Considered by FERC in the Draft EIS

    Some landowners are receiving the draft EIS because their property
has been identified as potentially being affected by certain route
alternatives recommended or considered by FERC staff to avoid or lessen
environmental impacts along Ruby's proposed pipeline route in several
locations. Refer to the discussion of the Terrace Basin, Willow Creek,
Southern Langell Valley, Sheldon, and Black Rock Route Alternatives in
section 3.4 of the draft EIS. Please note that while staff has
recommended the use of the first three listed alternatives, a decision
whether or not to recommend use of the Sheldon Route Alternative or
Black Rock Route Alternative has not yet been made. The Commission
staff wants to ensure that all potentially affected landowners have the
opportunity to participate in the environmental review process, thus
staff is soliciting comments to assist with the environmental analysis
of these route alternatives, which will be presented in the final EIS.
    Additional information about the project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs, at 1-866-208-FERC (3372) or on
the FERC Internet Web site (http://www.ferc.gov). Using the
``eLibrary'' link, select ``General Search'' from the eLibrary menu,
enter the selected date range and ``Docket Number,'' excluding the last
three digits in the Docket Number field (i.e., CP09-54), and follow the
instructions. You may also search using the phrase ``Ruby Pipeline
Project'' in the ``Text Search'' field. For assistance with access to
eLibrary, the helpline can be reached at 1-866-208-3676, TTY (202) 502-
8659, or at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>The eLibrary link on the FERC
Internet Web site also provides access to the texts of 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. To register for this service, go to http://www.ferc.gov/esubscribenow.htm.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-15151 Filed 6-25-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


                    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

            DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

                    OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

                             WASHINGTON, DC

Issued by the Department of Transportation on April 23, 2004

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-96-1141

________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________

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).

Application of     American Airlines, Inc.           filed    1/26/2004
 to:

XX  Renew allocation of seven weekly frequencies to perform the
following service:

Scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property, and mail
between Miami, Florida, and Grand Cayman, Cayman Islands.  American
requested renewal for an indefinite duration.

Applicant rep.:   Carl B. Nelson, Jr.<PHONE_NUMBER>    DOT analyst:
Gerald Caolo,<PHONE_NUMBER>

DISPOSITION

XX  Granted in part (subject to conditions, see below)

XX  Balance dismissed (i.e., for indefinite duration)

The above action was effective when taken:  April 23, 2004,  through
March 31, 2005

Action taken by:  Paul L. Gretch, Director

		  Office of International Aviation

XX  Authority granted is consistent with the aviation agreement between
the United States and the United Kingdom.

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

		XX  Holder’s certificates of public convenience and necessity

________________________

Conditions:  Consistent with our standard practice, the frequency
allocation granted is subject to the condition that if any frequencies
are not used for a period of 90 days, the allocation as to those
frequencies would expire automatically and the unused frequencies will
revert automatically to the Department for reallocation.

Remarks:  As the current Exchange of Letters between the United States
and the United Kingdom governing frequencies between Miami and Grand
Cayman expires March 31, 2005, we have made the frequency allocation
coextensive with the term of the Exchange of Letters, and dismissed
American's request for longer-term authority.

The authority for which American requested renewal expired March 31,
2004, but had been kept in force pursuant to the provisions of the
Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 558(c), as implemented by 14 CFR
Part 377, pending action on its timely-filed renewal application.

________________________________________________________________________
_____________

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that

(1) our action was consistent with Department policy; and (2) grant of
the authority was consistent with the public interest.  To the extent
not granted or dismissed, 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:

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

 PAGE

 PAGE   2


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 7 (Wednesday, January 11, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3304-3305]
[FR Doc No: 2017-00389]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG17-38-000.
    Applicants: Darby Power, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of Darby Power, LLC.
    Filed Date: 1/5/17.
    Accession Number: 20170105-5059.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/26/17.

    Docket Numbers: EG17-39-000.
    Applicants: Gavin Power, LLC.
    Description: Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale Generator
Status of Gavin Power, LLC.
    Filed Date: 1/5/17.
    Accession Number: 20170105-5062.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/26/17.

    Docket Numbers: EG17-40-000.
    Applicants: Lawrenceburg Power, LLC.
    Description: Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale Generator
Status of Lawrenceburg Power, LLC.
    Filed Date: 1/5/17.
    Accession Number: 20170105-5066.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/26/17.

    Docket Numbers: EG17-41-000.
    Applicants: Waterford Power, LLC.
    Description: Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale Generator
Status of Waterford Power, LLC.
    Filed Date: 1/5/17.
    Accession Number: 20170105-5067.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/26/17.

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

    Docket Numbers: ER17-358-001.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Amended Filing in ER17-358--Enhanced
Combined Cycle Tariff Revisions to be effective 3/1/2017.
    Filed Date: 1/5/17.
    Accession Number: 20170105-5000.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/19/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-745-000.
    Applicants: ITC Midwest LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Cancellation of Louisa
Connection Facilities Agreements to be effective 10/21/2016.
    Filed Date: 1/4/17.
    Accession Number: 20170104-5133.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/25/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-746-000.
    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2017-01-04 Arlington Valley
Solar 2 LGIA to be effective 3/6/2017.
    Filed Date: 1/4/17.
    Accession Number: 20170104-5145.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/25/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-747-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: GIA and Distribution Service
Agmt Morwind Project to be effective 12/16/2016.
    Filed Date: 1/5/17.
    Accession Number: 20170105-5007.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/26/17.

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

    Dated: January 5, 2017.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-00389 Filed 1-10-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 183 (Friday, September 22, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44432-44433]
[FR Doc No: 2017-20208]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2017-0767]

Merchant Mariner Medical Advisory Committee

AGENCY: U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security.

ACTION: Notice of Federal Advisory Committee Meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Merchant Mariner Medical Advisory Committee and its
Working Groups will meet to discuss matters relating to medical
certification determinations for issuance of licenses, certificates of
registry, and merchant mariners' documents, medical standards and
guidelines for the physical qualifications of operators of commercial
vessels, medical examiner education, and medical research. The meetings
will be open to the public.

DATES: The Merchant Mariner Medical Advisory Committee and its Working
Groups are scheduled to meet on Wednesday, October 18, 2017, and
Thursday, October 19, 2017, from 8 a.m. until 5:30 p.m. Please note
that these meetings may adjourn early if the Committee has completed
its business.

ADDRESSES: The meetings will be held at the U.S. Coast Guard National
Maritime Center in the Dales Larson Room on the third floor, 100 Forbes
Drive, Martinsburg, WV 25404-0001(https://www.uscg.mil/nmc/).
    Pre-registration Information: Pre-registration is required for
access to U.S.

Coast Guard, National Maritime Center. Foreign nationals participating
will be required to pre-register no later than 4 p.m. on October 4,
2017, to be admitted to the meeting. U.S. citizens participating will
be required to pre-register no later than 4 p.m. on October 11, 2017,
to be admitted to the meeting. To pre-register, contact Mr. Davis
Breyer at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or<PHONE_NUMBER>. You will be asked
to provide your name and telephone number. In addition, please provide
the company or group in which you are affiliated. Foreign nationals
will also need to provide your country of citizenship, passport
country, country of residence, place of birth, passport number, and
expiration date. All attendees will be required to provide a REAL ID
Act-compliant government-issued picture identification card in order to
gain admittance to the building. For more information on REAL ID and to
check the compliance status of your state/territory, please see https://www.dhs.gov/real-id and https://www.dhs.gov/real-id-public-faqs.
    For information on facilities or services for individuals with
disabilities or to request special assistance at the meeting, contact
the Alternate Designated Federal Officer as soon as possible using the
contact information provided in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section of this notice.
    Instructions: You are free to submit comments at any time,
including orally at the meetings, but if you want Committee members to
review your comment before the meetings, please submit your comments no
later than October 11, 2017. We are particularly interested in comments
on the issues in the ``Agenda'' section below. You must include
``Department of Homeland Security'' and the docket number USCG-2017-
0767. Written comments may also be submitted using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If you encounter
technical difficulties with comments submission, contact the individual
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section below. Comments
received will be posted without alteration at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. You
may review the Privacy and Security Notice for the Federal Docket
Management System at https://www.regulations.gov/privacyNotice.
    Docket Search: For access to the docket to read documents or
comments related to this notice, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type
USCG-2017-0767 in the ``Search'' box, press Enter, and then click on
the item you wish to view.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Davis Breyer, Alternate Designated
Federal Officer of the Merchant Mariner Medical Advisory Committee,
2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Ave SE., Stop 7509, Washington, DC 20593-
7509, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax<PHONE_NUMBER> or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice of this meeting is pursuant with the
Federal Advisory Committee Act, Title 5 United States Code Appendix.
    The Merchant Mariner Medical Advisory Committee Meeting is
authorized by section 210 of the U.S. Coast Guard Authorization Act of
2010 (Pub. L. 111-281, codified at 46 United States Code 7115). The
Committee advises the Secretary on matters related to (a) medical
certification determinations for issuance of licenses, certificates of
registry, and merchant mariners' documents; (b) medical standards and
guidelines for the physical qualifications of operators of commercial
vessels; (c) medical examiner education; and (d) medical research.

Agenda

Day 1

    The agenda for the October 18, 2017, meeting is as follows:
    (1) Opening remarks from the Designated Federal Officer.
    (2) Opening remarks from U.S. Coast Guard leadership.
    (3) Roll call of Committee members and determination of a quorum.
    (4) National Maritime Center brief.
    (5) Public comment period.
    (6) Working Groups will separately address the following task
statements which are available for viewing at https://homeport.uscg.mil/medmac.
    (a) Task statement 15-13, Mariner Occupational Health Risk Study
Analysis. This is a duplicate task statement with the Merchant Marine
Personnel Advisory Committee;
    (b) Task statement 16-24, requesting recommendations on appropriate
diets and wellness for mariners while aboard merchant vessels;
    (c) Task statement 17-25, requesting recommendations on functions
that would be useful to the mariner, ashore and afloat regarding their
medical certification;
    (d) Task statement 17-26, Input to Support Regulatory Reform of
Coast Guard Regulations-Executive Orders 13771 and 13783.
    (7) Adjournment of meeting.

Day 2

    The agenda for the October 19, 2017, meeting is as follows:
    (1) Committee work update.
    (2) Continue work on task statements.
    (3) Public comment period.
    (4) The Working Groups report, and if applicable, make
recommendations for the full Committee to consider for presentation to
the U.S. Coast Guard. The Committee may deliberate and vote on the
Working Group's recommendations on this date. The public will have an
opportunity to speak after each Working Group's Report before the full
Committee takes any action on each report.
    (5) Closing remarks/plans for next meeting.
    (6) Adjournment of Meeting.
    A copy of all meeting documentation will be available at https://homeport.uscg.mil/medmac no later than October 11, 2017. Alternatively,
you may contact Mr. Davis Breyer as noted in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION section above.
    Public comments will be limited to 5 minutes per speaker. Please
note that the public comment periods will end following the last call
for comments. Contact Mr. Davis Breyer as indicated in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document to register as a speaker.
    Please note that the meeting may adjourn early if the work is
completed.

    Dated: September 18, 2017.
Jeffrey G. Lantz,
Director of Commercial Regulations and Standards.
[FR Doc. 2017-20208 Filed 9-21-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P