[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 109 (Wednesday, June 7, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37301-37305]
[FR Doc No: 2023-12155]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

[Docket No. DOT-OST-2022-0117]

Privacy Act of 1974; System of Records

AGENCY: Office of the Departmental Chief Information Officer, Office of
the Secretary of Transportation, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of a new system of records.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974, the Department of
Transportation (DOT), Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), proposes
to establish a new system of records titled, ``DOT/FAA 856 Airmen
Medical Records.'' 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 61.23 Medical
Certificates: Requirement and Duration specify operations requiring
medical certificates. Collectively, for the purposes of this system of
records notice, individuals required to obtain medical certificates are
referred to as applicants. This Notice covers records maintained for
the required airmen medical certification process which is initiated by
the airman medical certificate application. In addition to the initial
medical records obtained at time of certification, FAA also maintains
information on post-certification medical changes including failed drug
and substance abuse testing results that could disqualify certificated
airmen. Finally, this system of records supports regulatory enforcement
activities and other legal actions, such as denial of medical
certifications, so records including, but not limited to, pre-
decisional notes in airmen medical files, are exempted from certain
access and disclosure requirements of the Privacy Act of 1974.

DATES: Submit comments on or before July 7, 2023. The Department may
publish an amended systems of records notice considering any comments
received. This new system will be effective immediately upon
publication. The routine uses will be effective July 7, 2023.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by docket number 2022-
0117 by any of the following methods:
     Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, Monday
through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: You must include the agency name and docket number
DOT-OST-2022-0117. All comments received will be posted without change
to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided.
    Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
comments received in any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov or to the street
address listed above. Follow the online instructions for accessing the
docket.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions, please contact: Karyn
Gorman, Departmental Chief Privacy Officer, Privacy Office, Department
of Transportation, Washington, DC 20590; [email protected]; or 202-366-
3140.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    In accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. 552a, DOT/FAA
proposes to issue a new system of records notice titled, DOT/FAA 856
``Airmen Medical Records'' (hereafter referred to as ``Notice'').

Airmen Medical Certification Process

    Records maintained in this system of records were previously
covered under DOT/FAA 847, Aviation Records on Individuals (75 FR
68849--November 9, 2010). To provide the public with greater
transparency and accountability to its business processes and data
collection, FAA created this new Notice to more precisely consolidate
records with similar purpose, authorities, categories of individuals,
sources of information, and retention timeframes. This system of
records covers all facets of the medical clearance process for airmen
and non-FAA Air Traffic Control Specialists (ATCSs) with privileges
under specific certifications. This Notice solely covers airmen and
non-

FAA ATCSs as FAA ATCSs' medical clearances are covered under the Office
of Personnel Management (OPM)/Government (GOVT)-10 Employee Medical
File System Records SORN (80 FR 74815--November 30, 2015).
    The airmen medical certification process includes applicants for
medical certificates, FAA Office of Aerospace Medicine (AAM) employees
and contractors, and Aviation Medical Examiners (AMEs). Applicants
consist of airmen and ATCSs who electronically submit the airman
medical certificate application to apply for FAA medical certification.
Applicants then select AMEs who are private physicians designated by
FAA to conduct medical examinations. These AMEs review applicants'
medical history and complete the requisite physical examinations. The
examination results are integrated into the airman medical certificate
application. Any issues or concerns regarding the medical examinations
are directed by AMEs to FAA AAM employees to resolve. The employees
also perform duties such as processing completed medical applications
and issuing medical certificates. When requested by applicants or FAA
AAM, external medical consultants, clinics and hospitals conduct
certain testing, such as psychological or cardiac evaluations, and
submit their medical findings to FAA AAM for inclusion in the airmen
files.
    This system of records covers airmen medical records associated
with the required medical certification process and includes airman
medical history, physical examinations, various specialized medical
exams, such as psychiatric and/or psychological testing, vision and
hearing exams, cardiology reports, and diagnostic laboratory testing
and imaging studies. Other records in the airmen medical file include
items such as substance abuse violations committed by certificated
airmen. These types of records are obtained through DOT employer
requirements and through the National Drivers' Registry and are used to
help determine whether or not the airman is eligible to hold an airman
medical certificate. Additional medical records are provided by
external physicians, hospitals and other clinicians, if there are
changes to the airman's medical history, for review in case this
negatively impacts the medical certificate holder. Pathological and
toxicological records resulting from aviation mishaps involving medical
certificate holders are also incorporated into the airman's file.
Records that support FAA legal actions (i.e., revocation of medical
certifications), such as pre-decisional notes in airmen medical files
that are incorporated into investigatory files, are exempted from
certain access and disclosure requirements of the Privacy Act of 1974,
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2).
    DOT has included both system specific and departmental general
routine uses, as they align with the purpose of this system of records
to support decision-making and regulatory enforcement activities
related to medical certification of airmen. As recognized by the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) in its Privacy Act Implementation
Guidance and Responsibilities (65 FR 19746 (July 9, 1975)), the routine
uses include proper and necessary uses of information in the system,
even if such uses occur infrequently. The system specific routine uses
include the following:
    1. Sharing of information with the National Transportation Safety
Board (NTSB) for purposes of investigating accidents and incidents
involving certificated airmen;
    2. Sharing with the general public information relating to an
individual's eligibility for medical certification, requests for
exemptions from medical requirements, and requests for review of
certificate denials;
    3. Sharing personal information of airmen with other federal
agencies for the purpose of verifying the accuracy and completeness of
medical information provided to FAA;
    4. Sharing past medical certification history with AMEs, so they
may render the best medical certification decision regarding airmen;
    5. Providing information about airmen to Federal, State, local and
Tribal law enforcement agencies when engaged in an official
investigation in which an airman is involved;
    6. Sharing records of an individual's positive drug test result,
alcohol test result of 0.04 or greater breath alcohol concentration, or
refusal to submit to testing required under a DOT-required testing
program, available to third parties, including employers and
prospective employers of such individuals. Such records will also
contain the names and titles of individuals who, in their commercial
capacity, administer the drug and alcohol testing programs of aviation
entities; and
    7. Providing information about airmen to Federal, State, local, and
Tribal law enforcement, national security or homeland security agencies
whenever such agencies are engaged in the performance of threat
assessments affecting the safety of transportation or national
security.

Privacy Act

    The Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a) governs the means by which the
Federal Government collects, maintains, and uses personally
identifiable information (PII) in a System of Records. A ``System of
Records'' is a group of any records under the control of a Federal
agency from which information about individuals is retrieved by name or
other personal identifier. The Privacy Act requires each agency to
publish in the Federal Register a System of Records Notice (SORN)
identifying and describing each System of Records the agency maintains,
including the purposes for which the agency uses PII in the system, the
routine uses for which the agency discloses such information outside
the agency, and how individuals to whom a Privacy Act record pertains
can exercise their rights under the Privacy Act (e.g., to determine if
the system contains information about them and to contest inaccurate
information). In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552a(r), DOT has provided a
report of this system of records to the Office of Management and Budget
and to Congress.

SYSTEM NAME AND NUMBER:
    DOT/FAA 856 Airmen Medical Records

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION:
    Sensitive, unclassified

SYSTEM LOCATION:
    Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Information Technology,
Enterprise Data Center (AIT-EDC), Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center,
6500 S MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169. Federal Aviation
Administration, Office of Information Technology, Enterprise Data
Center (AIT-EDC), William J. Hughes Technical Center, Atlantic City, NJ
08405.

SYSTEM MANAGER(S):
    Manager, Aerospace Medical Certification Division, AAM-300, Federal
Aviation Administration, Civil Aerospace Medical Institute, 6500 S
MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169;<PHONE_NUMBER>.

AUTHORITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM:
    49 U.S.C. 40101, 40113, 44701 and 44703.

PURPOSE(S) OF THE SYSTEM:
    The purpose of the system is to facilitate the medical fitness
decision-making process for medical certifications and to support
regulatory

enforcement activities as it relates to medical certification.

CATEGORIES OF INDIVIDUALS COVERED BY THE SYSTEM:
    Current and previous applicants for medical certificates.

CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM:
    Categories of records maintained in this system consist of
applicant personal records which include the following: names; social
security number (full or pseudo-SSN); address; phone number; email
address; date of birth; citizenship; physical characteristics (eye
color, hair color, height and weight); gender; employer; arrests,
convictions and/or administrative history (with explanations), and
authorization to National Driver Register (NDR) to provide FAA with
driving record results. Applicant medical history and examination
records consist of names of prescriptions, near vision contacts (Y/N),
medical history (check boxes for applicable conditions), healthcare
professionals visited (name, address, type of professional, reason),
medical examination findings and notes, hearing, vision, blood
pressure, pulse, urine test results, electrocardiogram, other tests
given, comments on medical history and findings, and statement of
demonstrated ability (SODA) serial number. Health professional records
consist of name and contact information (address and phone number), and
AME serial number in the case of AMEs. Other medical records may
include substance abuse test results or refusals to submit to testing,
pathological and toxicological records (if applicable), unique
identifiers/reference numbers, such as pathology index (PI),
certificate number, applicant identification number (ID), medical
identification number (MID), and federal tracking number (FTN).
Finally, FAA employee information consists of name and examiner
designation number.

RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES:
    Information is collected directly from the applicants and AMEs, FAA
employees, and when authorized by the applicants, from external
sources, such as the NDR, hospitals and physicians/clinicians.

ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THE SYSTEM, INCLUDING CATEGORIES
OF USERS AND THE PURPOSES OF SUCH USES:
    In addition to other disclosures generally permitted under 5 U.S.C.
552a(b) of the Privacy Act, all or a portion of the records or
information contained in this system may be disclosed outside of DOT as
a routine use pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(b)(3) as follows:
System Specific Routine Use
    1. To the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), entire
records related to the medical suitability of specific airmen for
purposes of aircraft investigation responsibilities and regulatory
enforcement activities as it relates to medical certification.
    2. To the general public, upon request, records such as information
relating to an individual's physical status or condition used to
determine statistically the validity of FAA medical standards; and
information relating to an individual's eligibility for medical
certification, requests for exemptions from medical requirements, and
requests for review of certificate denials.
    3. To other federal agencies, personally identifiable information
about airmen for the purpose of verifying the accuracy and completeness
of medical information provided to FAA in connection with applications
for airmen medical certification.
    4. To Aviation Medical Examiners (AMEs), past airmen medical
certification history data on a routine basis so that AMEs may render
the best medical certification decision.
    5. To Federal, State, local and Tribal law enforcement agencies,
information about airmen when engaged in an official investigation in
which an airman is involved;
    6. To third parties, including employers and prospective employers
of such individuals, records of an individual's positive drug test
result, alcohol test result of 0.04 or greater breath alcohol
concentration, or refusal to submit to testing required under a DOT-
required testing program. Such records will also contain the names and
titles of individuals who, in their commercial capacity, administer the
drug and alcohol testing programs of aviation entities; and
    7. To Federal, State, local, and Tribal law enforcement, national
security or homeland security agencies, information about airmen
whenever such agencies are engaged in the performance of threat
assessments affecting the safety of transportation or national
security.
Departmental Routine Uses
    8. In the event that a system of records maintained by DOT to carry
out its functions indicates a violation or potential violation of law,
whether civil, criminal or regulatory in nature, and whether arising by
general statute or particular program pursuant thereto, the relevant
records in the system of records may be referred, as a routine use, to
the appropriate agency, whether Federal, State, local or foreign,
charged with the responsibility of investigating or prosecuting such
violation or charged with enforcing or implementing the statute, or
rule, regulation, or order issued pursuant thereto.
    9. A record from this system of records may be disclosed, as a
routine use, to a Federal, State, or local agency maintaining civil,
criminal, or other relevant enforcement information or other pertinent
information, such as current licenses, if necessary to obtain
information relevant to a DOT decision concerning the hiring or
retention of an employee, the issuance of a security clearance, the
letting of a contract, or the issuance of a license, grant or other
benefit.
    10. A record from this system of records may be disclosed, as a
routine use, to a Federal agency, in response to its request, in
connection with the hiring or retention of an employee, the issuance of
a security clearance, the reporting of an investigation of an employee,
the letting of a contract, or the issuance of a license, grant, or
other benefit by the requesting agency, to the extent that the
information is relevant and necessary to the requesting agency's
decision on the matter.
    11a. Routine Use for Disclosure for Use in Litigation. It shall be
a routine use of the records in this system of records to disclose them
to the Department of Justice or other Federal agency conducting
litigation when (a) DOT, or any agency thereof, or (b) Any employee of
DOT or any agency thereof, in his/her official capacity, or (c) Any
employee of DOT or any agency thereof, in his/her individual capacity
where the Department of Justice has agreed to represent the employee,
or (d) The United States or any agency thereof, where DOT determines
that litigation is likely to affect the United States, is a party to
litigation or has an interest in such litigation, and the use of such
records by the Department of Justice or other Federal agency conducting
the litigation is deemed by DOT to be relevant and necessary in the
litigation, provided, however, that in each case, DOT determines that
disclosure of the records in the litigation is a use of the information
contained in the records that is compatible with the purpose for which
the records were collected.
    11b. Routine Use for Agency Disclosure in Other Proceedings. It
shall be a routine use of records in this system to disclose them in
proceedings before any court or adjudicative or administrative body
before which DOT or any agency thereof, appears, when (a)

DOT, or any agency thereof, or (b) Any employee of DOT or any agency
thereof in his/her official capacity, or (c) Any employee of DOT or any
agency thereof in his/her individual capacity where DOT has agreed to
represent the employee, or (d) The United States or any agency thereof,
where DOT determines that the proceeding is likely to affect the United
States, is a party to the proceeding or has an interest in such
proceeding, and DOT determines that use of such records is relevant and
necessary in the proceeding, provided, however, that in each case, DOT
determines that disclosure of the records in the proceeding is a use of
the information contained in the records that is compatible with the
purpose for which the records were collected.
    12. The information contained in this system of records will be
disclosed to the Office of Management and Budget, OMB in connection
with the review of private relief legislation as set forth in OMB
Circular No. A-19 at any stage of the legislative coordination and
clearance process as set forth in that Circular.
    13. Disclosure may be made to a Congressional office from the
record of an individual in response to an inquiry from the
Congressional office made at the request of that individual. In such
cases, however, the Congressional office does not have greater rights
to records than the individual. Thus, the disclosure may be withheld
from delivery to the individual where the file contains investigative
or actual information or other materials which are being used, or are
expected to be used, to support prosecution or fines against the
individual for violations of a statute, or of regulations of the
Department based on statutory authority. No such limitations apply to
records requested for Congressional oversight or legislative purposes;
release is authorized under 49 CFR 10.35(9).
    14. One or more records from a system of records may be disclosed
routinely to the National Archives and Records Administration in
records management inspections being conducted under the authority of
44 U.S.C. 2904 and 2906.
    15. Routine Use for disclosure to the Coast Guard and to
Transportation Security Administration. A record from this system of
records may be disclosed as a routine use to the Coast Guard and to the
Transportation Security Administration if information from this system
was shared with either agency when that agency was a component of the
Department of Transportation before its transfer to the Department of
Homeland Security and such disclosure is necessary to accomplish a DOT,
TSA or Coast Guard function related to this system of records.
    16. DOT may make available to another agency or instrumentality of
any government jurisdiction, including State and local governments,
listings of names from any system of records in DOT for use in law
enforcement activities, either civil or criminal, or to expose
fraudulent claims, regardless of the stated purpose for the collection
of the information in the system of records. These enforcement
activities are generally referred to as matching programs because two
lists of names are checked for match using automated assistance. This
routine use is advisory in nature and does not offer unrestricted
access to systems of records for such law enforcement and related
antifraud activities. Each request will be considered on the basis of
its purpose, merits, cost effectiveness and alternatives using
Instructions on reporting computer matching programs to the Office of
Management and Budget, OMB, Congress, and the public, published by the
Director, OMB, dated September 20, 1989.
    17. It shall be a routine use of the information in any DOT system
of records to provide to the Attorney General of the United States, or
his/her designee, information indicating that a person meets any of the
disqualifications for receipt, possession, shipment, or transport of a
firearm under the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act. In case of a
dispute concerning the validity of the information provided by DOT to
the Attorney General, or his/her designee, it shall be a routine use of
the information in any DOT system of records to make any disclosures of
such information to the National Background Information Check System,
established by the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, as may be
necessary to resolve such dispute.
    18a. To appropriate agencies, entities, and persons when (1) DOT
suspects or has confirmed that there has been a breach of the system of
records; (2) DOT has determined that as a result of the suspected or
confirmed breach there is a risk of harm to individuals, DOT (including
its information systems, programs, and operations), the Federal
Government, or national security; and (3) the disclosure made to such
agencies, entities, and persons is reasonably necessary to assist in
connection with DOT's efforts to respond to the suspected or confirmed
breach or to prevent, minimize, or remedy such harm.
    18b. To another Federal agency or Federal entity, when DOT
determines that information from this system of records is reasonably
necessary to assist the recipient agency or entity in (1) responding to
a suspected or confirmed breach or (2) preventing, minimizing, or
remedying the risk of harm to individuals, the recipient agency or
entity (including its information systems, programs, and operations),
the Federal Government, or national security, resulting from a
suspected or confirmed breach.
    19. DOT may disclose records from this system, as a routine use, to
the Office of Government Information Services for the purpose of (a)
resolving disputes between FOIA requesters and Federal agencies and (b)
reviewing agencies' policies, procedures, and compliance in order to
recommend policy changes to Congress and the President.
    20. DOT may disclose records from this system, as a routine use, to
contractors and their agents, experts, consultants, and others
performing or working on a contract, service, cooperative agreement, or
other assignment for DOT, when necessary to accomplish an agency
function related to this system of records.
    21. DOT may disclose records from this system, as a routine use, to
an agency, organization, or individual for the purpose of performing
audit or oversight operations related to this system of records, but
only such records as are necessary and relevant to the audit or
oversight activity. This routine use does not apply to intra-agency
sharing authorized under section (b)(1) of the Privacy Act.
    22. DOT may disclose from this system, as a routine use, records
consisting of, or relating to, terrorism information (6 U.S.C.
485(a)(5)), homeland security information (6 U.S.C. 482(f)(1)), or law
enforcement information (Guideline 2 Report attached to White House
Memorandum, ``Information Sharing Environment, November 22, 2006) to a
Federal, State, local, tribal, territorial, foreign government and/or
multinational agency, either in response to its request or upon the
initiative of the Component, for purposes of sharing such information
as is necessary and relevant for the agencies to detect, prevent,
disrupt, preempt, and mitigate the effects of terrorist activities
against the territory, people, and interests of the United States of
America, as contemplated by the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism
Prevention Act of 2004 (Pub. L. 108-458) and Executive Order 13388
(October 25, 2005).

POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR STORAGE OF RECORDS:
    Records in this system of records are stored in hard copy format in
a secure facility and in an electronic database system.

POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR RETRIEVAL OF RECORDS:
    Applicant medical records in this system are primarily retrieved by
name, SSN, and unique identifiers/reference numbers, such as PI, MID,
FTN, applicant ID, and certificate number.

POLICIES AND PRACTICE FOR RETENTION AND DISPOSAL OF RECORDS:
    A new National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) records
schedule requesting 100-year retention for airmen medical certification
records is being developed. The FAA will treat these records as
permanent records until it receives an approval of record disposition
authority from NARA. Any previous schedules attributed to this record
type are superseded.

ADMINISTRATIVE, TECHNICAL, AND PHYSICAL SAFEGUARDS:
    Records in this system are safeguarded in accordance with
applicable rules and policies, including all applicable DOT automated
systems security and access policies. Strict controls have been imposed
to minimize the risk of compromising the information that is being
stored. Access to records in this system is limited to those
individuals who have a need to know the information for the performance
of their official duties and who have appropriate clearances or
permissions.

RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURES:
    Individuals seeking notification of whether this system of records
contains information about them may contact the System Manager at the
address provided in the section ``System Manager.'' When seeking
records about yourself from this system of records or any other
Departmental system of records your request must conform to the Privacy
Act regulations set forth in 49 CFR part 10. You must sign your request
and your signature must either be notarized or submitted under 28
U.S.C. 1746, a law that permits statements to be made under penalty of
perjury as a substitute for notarization. If your request is seeking
records pertaining to another living individual, you must include a
statement from that individual certifying his/her agreement for you to
access his/her records.

CONTESTING RECORD PROCEDURE:
    See ``Record Access Procedures'' above.

NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE:
    See ``Record Access Procedures'' above.

EXEMPTIONS PROMULGATED FOR THE SYSTEM:
    Records that support FAA legal actions (i.e., revocation of medical
certifications), such as pre-decisional notes in airmen medical files
that are incorporated into investigatory files, are exempted from
certain access and disclosure requirements of the Privacy Act of 1974,
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2).

HISTORY:
    None.

    Issued in Washington, DC.
Karyn Gorman,
Departmental Chief Privacy Officer.
[FR Doc. 2023-12155 Filed 6-6-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P


DuPont Chemical Solutions Enterprise

Chambers Works

Deepwater, NJ  08023

CERTIFIED MAIL – Return Receipt Requested

November 14, 2006

Document Control Office

Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics

EPA East

Room 6428

US Environmental Protection Agency

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20460

Re: 	EPA – HQ – OPPT – 2003 - 0012

	DuPont Chambers Works NJPDES Permit No. NJ0005100

	PFOA Data Submittal – Outfall DSN662 Weekly Grab Samples

	August 2006 Sample Data

Dear Document Control Office,

As per Part IV, Section G.5.a of the NJPDES permit, we are submitting a summary of PFOA analytical results for the weekly grab samples taken at internal outfall DSN662A to NJDEP on a monthly basis. Per your request, we are sending you a paper and electronic copy of the report for samples taken during August 2006. We will continue to send you the reports each month.

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at (856) 540-3105.

Sincerely,

Karen L. Pinder

SET Environmental Coordinator

DuPont Chambers Works

Enclosures

Copies to:

Director, Chemical Control Division

Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics

EPA East

Room 4146

US Environmental Protection Agency

1201 Constitution Avenue, NW

Washington, DE 20004

Ms. Susan Rosenwinkel (cover letter only)

Principal Environmental Engineer

NJDEP Division of Water Quality

Bureau of Point Source Permitting – Region 2

401 E. State Street

P.O. Box 029

Trenton, NJ 08625-0029


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 29 (Monday, February 12, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 6014]
[FR Doc No: 2018-02787]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 14673-001]

Lock +TM Hydro Friends Fund II; Notice of Surrender of
Preliminary Permit

    Take notice that Lock +TM Hydro Friends Fund II,
permittee for the proposed Coffeeville Lock and Dam Hydroelectric
Project, has requested that its preliminary permit be terminated. The
permit was issued on June 3, 2016, and would have expired on May 31,
2019.\1\ The project would have been located on the Tombigbee River, in
Clark and Choctaw Counties, Alabama.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 154 FERC ] 62,094 (2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The preliminary permit for Project No. 14673 will remain in effect
until the close of business, March 8, 2018. If the Commission is closed
on this day, then the permit remains in effect until the close of
business on the next day in which the Commission is open.\2\ New
applications for this site may not be submitted until after the permit
surrender is effective.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 18 CFR 385.2007(a)(2) (2017).

    Dated: February 6, 2018.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-02787 Filed 2-9-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: March 18, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 52)]
[Notices]
[Page 13169-13170]
[DOCID:fr18mr10-108]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-61692; File No. SR-OCC-2010-0]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Options Clearing Corporation;
Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change Relating to ETFS Palladium
Shares And ETFS Platinum Shares

March 11, 2010.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934,\1\ notice is hereby given that on March 1, 2010, The Options
Clearing Corporation (``OCC'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and
III below, which Items have been prepared primarily by OCC. 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The proposed rule change would add ETFS Palladium Shares and ETFS
Platinum Shares to the interpretation following the definition of
``fund share'' in Article I, Section 1 of OCC's By-Laws.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, OCC included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. OCC 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

    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to remove any potential
cloud on the jurisdictional status of options or security futures on
ETFS Palladium Shares or ETFS Platinum Shares. To accomplish this
purpose, OCC is proposing to amend the interpretation following the
definition of ``fund share'' in Article I, Section 1 of OCC's By-Laws.
On May 30, 2008, the Commission approved rule filing SR-OCC-2008-07,
which added the interpretation with respect to the treatment and
clearing of options and security futures on SPDR Gold Shares.\2\ On
December 4, 2008, the Commission approved rule filings SR-OCC-2008-13
and SR-OCC-2008-14, which amended the interpretation to extend similar
treatment to options and security futures on iShares[supreg] COMEX Gold
Shares and iShares[supreg] Silver Shares.\3\ On February 25, 2010, the
Commission approved rule filing SR-OCC-2009-20, which extended similar
treatment to options and security futures on ETFS Physical Swiss Gold
Shares and ETFS Physical Silver Shares.\4\ Under the current proposed
rule change, OCC would also (i) clear and treat as securities options
any option contracts on ETFS Palladium Shares and ETFS Platinum Shares
that are traded on securities exchanges and (ii) clear and treat as
security futures any futures contracts on ETFS Palladium Shares and
ETFS Platinum Shares.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57895, 73 FR 32066 (June
5, 2008).
    \3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59054, 73 FR 75159 (Dec.
10, 2008).
    \4\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 61591, 75 FR 9979 (Mar.
4, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its capacity as a ``derivatives clearing organization''
registered with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (``CFTC''),
OCC is filing this proposal for prior approval by the CFTC pursuant to
provisions of the Commodity Exchange Act (``CEA'') in order to
foreclose any potential liability under the CEA based on an argument
that the clearing by OCC of such options as securities options or the
clearing of such futures as security futures constitutes a violation of
the CEA. The products for which approval is requested are essentially
the same as the options and security futures on SPDR Gold Shares,
iShares[reg] COMEX Gold Shares, and iShares[reg] Silver Shares that OCC
currently clears pursuant to the rule changes referred to above and
exemptions issued by the CFTC.\5\ OCC believes that this filing raises
no new regulatory or policy issues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ CFTC Order Exempting the Trading and Clearing of Certain
Products Related to SPDR Gold Trust Shares, 73 FR 31981 (June 5,
2008). CFTC Order Exempting the Trading and Clearing of Certain
Products Related to iShares[reg] COMEX Gold Trust Shares and
iShares[reg] Silver Trust Shares, 73 FR 79830 (Dec. 3, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OCC states that the proposed interpretation of OCC's By-Laws is
consistent with the purposes and requirements of Section 17A of the Act
\6\ because it is designed to promote the prompt and accurate clearance
and settlement of transactions in securities options and security
futures, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in
the clearance and settlement of such transactions, to remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a national system for the
prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of such transactions, and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest. OCC states
that the proposed rule change accomplishes these purposes by reducing
the likelihood of a dispute as to the Commission's jurisdiction or
shared jurisdiction in the case of security futures over derivatives
based on ETFS Palladium Shares or ETFS Platinum Shares. OCC also states
that the

proposed rule change is not inconsistent with OCC's By-Laws and Rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    OCC does not believe that the proposed rule change would impose any
burden on competition.

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

    OCC has not solicited or received written comments relating to the
proposed rule change. OCC will notify the Commission of any written
comments it receives.

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

    Within thirty-five days of the date of publication of this notice
in the Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the
Commission may designate up to ninety days of such date if it finds
such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so
finding, or (ii) as to which the self-regulatory organization consents,
the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve the proposed rule change, or
    (B) Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

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 No. SR-OCC-2010-03 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File No. SR-OCC-2010-03. 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 Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at OCC's principal office and on OCC's Web site
at http://www.theocc.com/publications/rules/proposed_changes/
proposed_changes.jspU>. 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 submission should refer to File No. SR-
OCC-2010-03 and should be submitted on or before April 8, 2010.

    For the Commission by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-5914 Filed 3-17-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


FILE NAME: company. wpt ( 7/ 1/ 2003) ( xml)

COMPANY FEDERAL REGISTER DOCUMENT SUBMISSION TEMPLATE ( 7/ 1/ 2003)

EPA Registration Division contact: [ Lana Coppolino, 703 305 0086]

[ Bayer CropScience]

[ PP 4F6830] EPA has received a pesticide petition ([ 4F6830]) from Bayer CropScience, 2 T. W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 proposing, 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 tolerances for residue of prothioconazole and its desthio metabolite in or on the raw agricultural commodities and processed commodities barley, grain at 0.2 parts per million ( ppm); barley, hay at 7.0 ppm; barley, straw at 2.0 ppm; barley, pearled barley at 0.2 ppm; barley, bran at 0.4 ppm; black mustard, seed at 0.1 ppm; borage, seed at 0.1 ppm; canola, seed at 0.1 ppm; crambe, seed at 0.1 ppm; mustard seed, field at 0.1 ppm; flax, seed at 0.1 ppm; grain, aspirated fractions at 13.0 ppm; Indian mustard, seed at 0.1 ppm; Indian rapeseed at 0.1 ppm; pea and bean, dried shelled, except soybean, subgroup at 0.8 ppm; peanut, nutmeat at 0.02 ppm; peanut, hay at 5.0 ppm; peanut, meal at 0.3 ppm; rapeseed, seed at 0.1 ppm; rice, grain at 0.25 ppm; rice, straw at 1.5 ppm; rice, hulls at 1.0 ppm; wheat, grain at 0.06 ppm; wheat, forage at 7.0 ppm; wheat, hay at 4.0 ppm; wheat, straw at 2.3 ppm; wheat, bran at 1.5 ppm; and wheat, germ at 0.15 ppm; as well as tolerances for residues of prothioconazole, its desthio metabolite, and 4 hydroxy metabolite and conjugates of each in meat, cattle at 0.01 ppm; meat by products, cattle at 1.2 ppm; fat, cattle at 0.1 ppm and milk at 0.006 ppm. EPA has determined that the petition contains data or information regarding the elements set forth in section 408( d)( 2) of the FFDCA; 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. EPA has determined that the petition contains data or information regarding the elements set forth in section 408( d)( 2) of the FFDCA; 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 and large animal metabolism. [ In plants, the metabolism of prothioconazole is adequately understood for purposes of establishing these proposed tolerances. Prothioconazole was extensively metabolized in plants with the major residue found in all crops ( wheat, peanuts and sugar beets) being JAU6476 desthio with smaller amounts of various isomers of JAU6476 hydroxy desthio, and their conjugates also being found. Triazolylalanine, triazolylhydroxypropionic acid, and triazolylacetic acid, metabolites common to the triazolederivative class of fungicides, were also found. Based on the above data the residues of concern in plants are prothioconazole and its metabolite JAU6476 desthio. The risk assessment for the common metabolites arising from the triazole derivative fungicides is being addressed by the US Triazole Task Force. In large animals, the nature of residues is also adequately understood for Page 2 of 8 purposes of establishing the proposed tolerances. The residues of concern in edible tissues and milk are prothioconazole, its metabolites JAU6476 desthio, JAU6476 4 hydroxy, and their conjugates that can be converted to these three compounds by acid hydrolysis. ]

2. Analytical method. [ The analytical method for determining residues of concern in plants extracts residues of prothioconazole and JAU6476 desthio and converts the prothioconazole to JAU6476 desthio and JAU6476 sulfonic acid. Following addition of internal standards the sample extracts are analyzed by LC/ MS/ MS. Radiovalidation and independent laboratory validation have shown that the method adequately quantifies prothioconazole residues in treated commodities. The analytical method for analysis of large animal tissues includes extraction of the residues of concern, followed by addition of an internal standard to the extract. The extract is then hydrolyzed to release conjugates, partitioned and analyzed by LC/ MS/ MS as prothioconazole, JAU6476 desthio and JAU6476 4 hydroxy. The method for analysis of milk eliminated the initial extraction step in the tissue method.]

3. Magnitude of residues. [ Field trials were conducted for the various crops according to label use directions. Results of analysis of the various crop samples are given below. i Barley: A total of 25 field trials ( 23 harvest and 2 decline) were conducted as part of the supervised crop field trial study to measure the prothioconazole derived residues in/ on barley following two foliar spray applications of JAU6476 480 SC at a target rate of 0.11 lb ai/ acre ( 0.123 kg ai/ ha) for the first application and 0.18 lb ai/ acre ( 0.202 kg ai/ ha) for the second application, equivalent to 1X the maximum proposed rate. Ten sites were in the United States and 15 sites were in Canada. Barley hay was collected 14 ( ± 2) days after the second application, and barley grain and straw were collected at earliest commercial harvest ( ECH). Pre harvest intervals ( PHIs) ranged from 12 to 16 days for hay, and from 30 to 71 days for grain and straw. The total prothioconazole highest average field trial ( HAFT) residue was 0.15 ppm in/ on barley grain at ECH of 32 days after treatment ( DAT) with a maximum residue of 0.16 ppm. In barley hay the HAFT total prothioconazole derived residue was 5.95 ppm found at ECH of 13 DAT with a maximum residue of 6.59 ppm. In barley straw the HAFT total prothioconazole derived residue was 1.65 ppm found at ECH of 36 DAT with a maximum residue of 1.87 ppm. In decline trials the total prothioconazole derived residue decreased slightly with time in hay and straw, but not in grain.

ii. Wheat. A total of 54 field trials ( 52 harvest and 2 decline) at 33 sites were conducted as part of the supervised crop field trial study for wheat to measure the prothioconazole derived residues in/ on wheat following two foliar spray applications of JAU6476 480 SC at a target rate of 0.113 lb ai/ acre ( 0.127 kg ai/ ha) for the first application and 0.18 lb ai/ acre ( 0.202 kg ai/ ha) for the second application, equivalent to 1X the maximum proposed rate. Seventeen sites were in the United States and 16 sites were in Canada. Wheat forage was collected at 7 days after the second application ( DAT), wheat hay 14( ± 2) DAT, and wheat grain and straw were collected at ECH. PHIs were 7 days for forage, and ranged from 12 to 17 days for hay, and from 10 to 57 days for grain and straw. The prothioconazole derived HAFT residue in/ on wheat grain were 0.05 ppm with a maximum residue of 0.06 ppm. For wheat forage, hay and straw the HAFT was 5.84 ppm, 3.54 ppm and 1.90 ppm, respectively. The corresponding Page 3 of 8 maximum residues were 6.99ppm, 3.57 ppm and 1.96 ppm. The total prothioconazole derived residues declined rapidly over time in wheat forage and hay samples, but not in wheat straw. Since wheat grain had very low or non detectable residues, residue decline could not be measured. Results of the wheat processing study indicated that prothioconazole residues concentrated in bran ( 2.4X) and germ ( 2.0X), but not in flour, middlings or shorts. A concentration factor of 250X was determined for aspirated grain fractions.

iii. Rice. A total of 16 field trials ( 14 harvest and 2 decline) were conducted as part of the supervised crop field trial study for wheat to measure the prothioconazole derived residues in/ on rice following two foliar spray applications of JAU6476 480 SC at a target rate of 0.18 lb ai/ acre/ application ( 0.20 kg ai/ ha/ application), equivalent to 1.25X the maximum proposed rate. All 16 sites were in the United States. Rice grain and rice straw were collected at ECH from each treated plot with PHIs ranging from 40 to 67 days for rice grain and straw. The HAFT total prothioconazole derived residue was 0.19 ppm in/ on rice grain at an ECH of 40 DAT with a maximum residue of 0.22 ppm. In rice straw the HAFT total prothioconazole derived residue was 1.33 ppm with a maximum of 1.58 ppm. Results of the rice processing study indicated that prothioconazole residues concentrated in rice hulls ( 4.4X), but not in polished grain or bran.

iv. Peanuts. A total of 12 field trials ( 11 harvest and 1 decline trial) were conducted as part of the supervised crop field trial study for peanuts to measure the prothioconazole derived residues in/ on peanuts following four foliar spray applications of JAU6476 480 SC at a target rate of 0.18 lb ai/ acre/ application ( 0.20 kg ai/ ha/ application), equivalent to 1X the maximum proposed rate. All twelve sites were in the United States. Peanuts ( nutmeats with shells) and peanut hay were each collected at full maturity at 14 ( ± 1) DAT. The total prothioconazole derived residue was less than the LOQ (< 0.02 ppm) in all peanut nutmeat samples at full maturity ( 14 ( ± 1) DAT). The HAFT total prothioconazole derived residue was 3.63 ppm in/ on peanut hay at a PHI of 14 days with a maximum residue of 4.46 ppm. No decline in total prothioconazole derived residue was observed in peanut hay with time. Results of the peanut processing study indicated that prothioconazole residues concentrated in the peanut meal ( 13.3X), but not in dry roasted peanuts, peanut butter or refined oil.

v. Canola. A total of 22 field trials ( 20 harvest and 2 decline) were conducted as part of the supervised crop field trial study for canola to measure the prothioconazole derived residues in/ on canola following two foliar spray applications of JAU6476 480 SC at a target rate of 0.18 lb ai/ acre/ application ( 0.20 kg ai/ ha/ application), equivalent to 1X the maximum proposed rate. Six sites were in the United States and 16 sites were in Canada. Canola seed was collected at ECH. PHIs ranged from 36 to 83 days for canola seed. The HAFT total prothioconazole derived residue was 0.09 ppm in/ on canola seed at ECH of 37 DAT with a maximum residue of 0.10 ppm. The prothioconazole total residue in all decline study samples was less than the LOQ. Results from a processing study indicated that prothioconazole residues did not concentrate in canola meal or refined oil.

vi. Dried Shelled Peas and Beans ( Crop Subgroup 6C): A total of 23 field trials ( 11 harvest and 2 decline trials for dried pea, and 9 harvest and 1 decline trial for dried beans) were conducted Page 4 of 8 as part of the supervised crop field trial studies for dried peas and dried beans to measure the prothioconazole derived residues in/ on peas and beans following three foliar spray applications of JAU6476 480 SC at a target rate of 0.180 lb ai/ acre/ application ( 0.200 kg ai/ ha/ application), equivalent to 1X the maximum proposed rate. For the dried pea trials, 6 sites were in the United States and 7 sites were in Canada. For the dried bean trials, 8 sites were in the United States and 2 sites were in Canada. Seed was collected at full maturity. PHIs ranged from 7 to 8 days for both dried peas and dried beans. The HAFT total prothioconazole derived residue was 0.66 ppm in/ on dried peas at full maturity at a pre harvest interval ( PHI) of 8 days with a maximum residue of 0.68 ppm. In dried beans, the HAFT total prothioconazole derived residue was 0.24 ppm at full maturity at a PHI of 7 days with a maximum residue of 0.29 ppm. The total prothioconazole derived residue decreased with time in dried bean decline trial and one of the dried pea decline trials but not in the second dried pea decline trial .]

B. Toxicological Profile 1. Acute toxicity. [ Prothioconazole exhibits very low acute oral, dermal and inhalation toxicity. The acute oral LD50 for prothioconazole in rats was > 6200 mg/ kg/ day while the dermal LD50 was > 2000 mg/ kg/ day and the four hour rat inhalation LC50 > 4990 mg/ m3. Prothioconazole was not irritating to the eye or skin of rabbits and did not cause skin sensitization in guinea pigs.] 2. Genotoxicty. [ Prothioconazole is not mutagenic. Slightly positive and equivocal responses seen in in vitro cytogenetic and UDS assays were negative in in vivo tests.] 3. Reproductive and developmental toxicity. [ Prothioconazole is not considered a primary reproductive toxicant in a two Generation rat reproduction study. The NOAEL for parental toxicity is 9.7 mg/ kg bw/ day and the NOAEL for reproductive and neonatal effects is 95.6 mg/ kg bw/ day. In the rat oral developmental toxicity study the fetal NOAEL was 500 mg/ kg bw/ day and the maternal NOAEL was 80 mg/ kg bw/ day. A dose level of 1000 mg/ kg bw/ day administered to the rat by the dermal route does not elicit developmental toxicity. In the rabbit, prothioconazole does not produce developmental toxicity at dose levels exceeding the maximum tolerated dose. Thus, prothioconazole is not teratogenic in either the rat or rabbit.] 4. Subchronic toxicity. [ 90 day feeding studies conducted in rats, mice, and dogs showed the liver and/ or kidney to be the target organs. In these subchronic studies NOAELs were established at 100 mg/ kg/ day for the rat and 25 mg/ kg/ day for the mouse and dog.] 5. Chronic toxicity. [ Prothioconazole is not carcinogenic in either the rat or the mouse even at dose levels in the rat exceeding the maximum tolerated dose. The liver and kidney are target organs of prothioconazole for non neoplastic toxicity in the rat, mouse and dog. The lowest NOAEL established on the basis of long term toxicity studies is 5 mg/ kg bw/ day in the rat chronic toxicity/ carcinogenicity study and the dog 52 week toxicity study.] 6. Animal metabolism. [ Metabolism and pharmacokinetic studies in the rat demonstrate that prothioconazole is rapidly absorbed, metabolized and eliminated. The primary metabolites included JAU6476 desthio, as well as S and O glucuronides of prothioconazole.] Page 5 of 8 7. Metabolite toxicology. [ The major metabolite of prothioconazole in the rat, plants and large animals is JAU6476 desthio. Therefore, a comprehensive evaluation of the mammalian toxicity of JAU6476 desthio has been performed.

The acute oral, dermal, and inhalation toxicity of JAU6476 desthio in the rat is low ( LD50 values: 2806 / 2506mg/ kg [ male/ female], > 5000mg/ kg, , 4 hour LC50: > 5077mg/ m3, respectively). It is non irritating to skin and only very slightly irritating to eyes and has no cutaneous sensitizing potential by topical application.

The short and long term oral toxicity of JAU6476 desthio has been investigated by dietary administration in the rat, mouse and dog. The common target organ in all 3 species is the liver. Secondary effects on the thyroid in the rat and dog were associated with increased hepatic enzyme induction. In the long term studies, 52 weeks in the rat and 30 weeks in the dog, the NOAEL for the rat and the dog were 1.1 and 10.1 mg/ kg bw/ day, respectively. JAU6476 desthio is not carcinogenic in either the rat or the mouse. The NOAEL selected for human risk assessment is 1.1 mg/ kg bw/ day established in the combined chronic toxicity and carcinogenicity study in the rat.

JAU6476 desthio was negative for mutagenicity and genotoxicity in all in vitro and in vivo studies both with and without metabolic activation In a two generation reproduction study the maternal NOAEL was 2.7 mg/ kg bw/ day and the NOAEL for reproductive and neonatal effects 10.0 mg/ kg bw/ day. The main targets at the highest dose were dystocia ( probably secondary to hepatic toxicity), decreased pup viability, growth retardation and low incidence of cleft palates.

In the developmental toxicity studies cleft palates were seen in the rat and rabbit at the highest dose levels and supernumerary ribs in the rat at lower dose levels. The oral NOAEL is 1 mg/ kg bw/ day in the rat and 2 mg/ kg/ day in the rabbit.

A developmental neurotoxicity study ( DNT) in rats was conducted with JAU6476 desthio as the anticipated dietary exposure is mainly to JAU6476 desthio and not the parent. No evidence of neurotoxicity was seen in this study, including no compound related effects involving neurobehavioral tests and neuropathology. Compound related effects were limited to overt toxicity and developmental effects which were consistent with effects seen in other developmental toxicity studies. The overall NOAEL was 3.6 mg/ kg bw/ day.] 8. Endocrine disruption. [ The toxicology database for prothioconazole is current and complete. Studies in this database include evaluation of the potential effects on carcinogenic, reproduction and development effects including an evaluation of the pathology of the endocrine organs following short or long term exposure. Prothioconazole is considered not to have primary endocrine effects.] Page 6 of 8 C. Aggregate Exposure 1. Dietary exposure. [ Prothioconazole is a new broad spectrum systemic fungicide with efficacy against a range of diseases in cereals, vegetables, canola, peanuts and rice. An aggregate risk assessment was conducted for all pending uses on barley, dried beans and peas ( Crop Group 6C), canola, peanuts, rice and wheat. The acute toxicity endpoint used in the acute assessment was the NOAEL of 1.0 mg/ kg/ day for the rat developmental toxicity study for JAU6476 desthio, the major metabolite of prothioconazole in plants and animal . Application of a 100x uncertainty factor resulted in an acute reference dose ( aRfD) of 0.01 mg/ kg/ day. The chronic reference dose ( cRfD) of 0.011 mg/ kg/ day resulted from application of a 100x uncertainty factor to the NOAEL of 1.1 mg/ kg/ day from the rat chronic toxicity study with JAU6476 desthio.

Results from the acute and chronic dietary exposure assessment described below demonstrate a reasonable certainty that no harm to the overall U. S. population or any population subgroup will result from the use of prothioconazole on the above crops.] i. Food. [ An acute, Tier 2 dietary ( food) risk assessment was conducted using the highest field trial ( HAFT) residue values for non blended commodities and average residue values for blended commodities and assuming 100% crop treated for all crops. The acute analysis indicated that the most highly exposed population subgroup was Children ( 1 2 yrs) with an exposure equal to 1.9% of the acute reference dose. The U. S. population had an exposure of 1.1% of the acute reference dose. A chronic, Tier 2 dietary ( food) risk assessment was conducted using average residues for all crops and incorporating anticipated percent crop treated data. The chronic assessment indicated that the most highly exposed population subgroup was Children ( 1 2 yrs) with an exposure equal to 0.2% of the chronic reference dose. Chronic exposure to the overall U. S. population was 0.1% of the chronic reference dose.] ii. Drinking water. [ No monitoring data are available for residues of prothioconazole in drinking water and EPA has established no health advisory levels or maximum contaminant levels for residues of prothioconazole in drinking water. Conservative surface water estimates of prothioconazole and its primary soil metabolites ( JAU6476 desthio and S methyl JAU6476) in drinking water were determined using PRZM/ EXAMS. Summation of these estimated concentrations ( in JAU6476 desthio toxicity equivalents) resulted in the acute and chronic drinking water concentrations ( EDWC). The maximum peak day ( acute) EDWC concentration was 2.56 ppb and the annual average ( chronic) concentration was 0.79 ppb for untreated drinking water derived from surface water. The calculated acute drinking water level of comparison ( aDWLOC) is 98 ppb for children and 346 ppb for adults. The chronic drinking water level of comparison ( cDWLOC) is 110 ppb for children and 385 ppb for adults. The acute and chronic estimated drinking water concentrations are well below calculated drinking water levels of comparison and demonstrate that the aggregate exposure ( food and water) to prothioconazole residues from the requested uses is well below the Agency's level of concern.] 2. Non dietary exposure. [ Prothioconazole is not registered for residential uses nor are any registrations pending for such uses.]

D. Cumulative Effects [ Prothioconazole is a member of the conazole family of fungicides. The cumulative Page 7 of 8 effects of the primary common metabolites are being addressed by the US Triazole Task Force.]

E. Safety Determination 1. U. S. population. [ Based on the conservative exposure assumptions described above and on the completeness of the toxicity data, it can be concluded that total food exposure to prothioconazole from all proposed uses will utilize less than 2% of the acute RfD and less than 1% of the chronic RfDs for the overall U. S. population. EPA generally has no concerns for exposures below 100% of the RfD, because the RfD represents the level at or below which daily aggregate exposure over a lifetime will not pose appreciable risks to human health. Drinking water levels of comparison based on the dietary exposure are greater than highly conservative estimated drinking water concentrations. Thus, it can be concluded that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure of the U. S. population to prothioconazole residues.] 2. Infants and children. [ For the most highly exposed population subgroups ( Children 1 2 years), total food exposure to prothioconazole will also utilize less than 2% of the acute RfD and less than 1% of the chronic RfD. EPA generally has no concerns for exposures below 100% of the RfD, because the RfD represents the level at or below which daily aggregate exposure over a lifetime will not pose appreciable risks to human health. Drinking water levels of comparison based on the dietary exposure are greater than highly conservative estimated drinking water concentrations. Thus, it can be concluded that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure to prothioconazole residues.

In assessing the potential for additional sensitivity of infants and children to residues of prothioconazole, the data from developmental studies in both rat and rabbit and a two generation reproduction study in rats have been considered. The developmental toxicity studies evaluate potential adverse effects on the developing animal resulting from pesticide exposure of the mother during prenatal development. The reproduction study evaluates effects from exposure to the pesticide on the reproductive capability of mating animals through two generations, as well as any observed systemic toxicity.

FFDCA Section 408 provides that EPA may apply an additional safety or uncertainty factor for infants and children in the case of threshold effects to account for pre and post natal effects or the completeness of the toxicity database. Based on current toxicological data requirements, the toxicology database for prothioconazole relative to pre and post natal effects is complete and shows no developmental effects at maternally non toxic doses. For the metabolite JAU6476 desthio, although developmental effects were seen, the NOAEL for malformation is ten times higher than the NOAEL used for risk assessment. Therefore, an additional uncertainty factor is not warranted and the cRfD of 0.011 mg/ kg bw/ day is appropriate for assessing aggregate risk to infants and children.]

F. International Tolerances [ No CODEX Maximum Residue Levels ( MRL's) have been established for residues of prothioconazole on any crops at this time.] Page 8 of 8


[Federal Register: November 28, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 230)]
[Notices]
[Page 72546-72547]
[DOCID:fr28no08-130]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-58984; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2008-121]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
of Proposed Rule Change Amending Rule 5.2(j)(6) To Increase the
Permissible Aggregate Weight of Underlying Foreign Country Securities

November 20, 2008.
    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 29, 2008, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'' or ``Exchange''),
through its wholly owned subsidiary, NYSE Arca Equities, Inc. (``NYSE
Arca Equities''), filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by NYSE Arca. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 5.2(j)(6) in order to permit
foreign country securities whose primary foreign markets are not
subject to a comprehensive surveillance sharing agreement to account
for up to 50% of the aggregate weight of the index. The text of the
proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at http://
www.nyse.com, at the Exchange's principal office, and at the
Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the 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 parts of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    Currently, the Exchange's listing standards for equity index linked
securities (``Equity Index-Linked Securities'') limit the permissible
aggregate weight of underlying foreign country securities to 20% of the
overall index where the primary trading markets of the foreign country
securities or American Depository Receipts (``ADRs'') are not members
of the Intermarket Surveillance Group (``ISG'') or are not otherwise
parties to comprehensive surveillance sharing agreements (``CSSA'')
with the Exchange. The Exchange proposes to amend NYSE Arca Equities
Rule 5.2(j)(6)(B)(I)(1)(b)(v) to increase the permissible aggregate
weight of such underlying foreign country securities up to 50% of the
overall index.\3\ According to the proposal, the Exchange will permit
the listing and trading of Equity Index-Linked Securities where the
underlying foreign country securities or ADRs, which trade on foreign
markets that are not ISG members or are not otherwise subject to a CSSA
agreement with the Exchange, account for up to 50% of the aggregate
dollar weight of the index, so long as: (i) The securities of any one
primary foreign market which is not an ISG member or does not have a
CSSA with the Exchange do not represent more than 20% of the dollar
weight of the index, and (ii) the securities of any two primary foreign
markets which are not ISG members or do not have a CSSA with the
Exchange do not represent more than 33% of the dollar weight of the
index. As a result

of the proposed amendment, the Exchange also seeks to make additional
minor modifications to Rule 5.2(j)(6)(B)(I)(1)(b)(v) relating to
punctuation and format and other non-substantive changes.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ E-mail from Andrew Stevens, Chief Counsel, NYSE Euronext, to
Christopher W. Chow, Special Counsel, Commission, dated November 20,
2008.
    \4\ E-mail from Tim Malinowski, Director, NYSE Euronext, to
Edward Cho, Special Counsel, Division of Trading and Markets,
Commission, dated November 5, 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This amendment is consistent with NYSE Arca Options Rule
5.3(g)(2)(A), which establishes the standards for the listing and
trading of options on Exchange-Traded Funds. Approved in 2001, the
Commission specifically noted in its order that requiring comprehensive
surveillance agreement to be in place between the Exchange and the
primary markets for foreign securities that comprise 50% or more of the
weight of the underlying index ``provides an adequate mechanism for the
exchange of surveillance sharing information necessary to detect and
deter possible market manipulation.'' \5\ The Commission also
recognized that the additional conditions regarding the concentration
of foreign securities in any one or more uncovered countries, ensure
that a ``significant percentage of the portfolio is not made up of
securities from uncovered countries.'' \6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 44025 (February 28,
2001), 66 FR 13986 (March 8, 2001) (SR-PCX-01-12). This rule change
is also consistent with Commentary .06 of Rule 915 of the American
Stock Exchange, Inc. [sic] (``Amex''). See Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 40157 (July 1, 1998), 63 FR 37426 (July 10, 1998) (SR-
Amex-96-44) (order approving Commentary .06 to Amex Rule 915,
establishing the 50% / 20% / 33% standards for purposes of listing
and trading options on Exchange Traded Funds).
    \6\ Id. See also Securities Exchange Act Release No. 40761
(December 8 1998), 63 FR 70952 (December 22, 1998) (S7-13-98) (in
its guidance to self-regulatory organizations on new derivative
securities products, the Commission noted the then recent approval
of Commentary .06 to Amex Rule 915 for its discussion of an
appropriate percentage of CSSA coverage (as it pertained to the
specific product class of options)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed amendment does not impose
any burden on competition or significantly affect the protection of
investors. The revised standard allows for increased flexibility with
respect to listing and trading Equity Index-Linked Securities, while
also providing an adequate mechanism for the exchange of surveillance
sharing information necessary to detect and deter possible market
manipulation.
2. Statutory Basis
    The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) \7\ of the
Act, in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) \8\ in
particular in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with
persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, and to
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanisms of a free and open
market and a national market system. The proposed standard, which is
consistent with NYSE Arca Options Rule 5.3(g)(2)(A), provides an
appropriate mechanism for the exchange of surveillance sharing
information necessary to detect and deter possible market manipulation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \8\ 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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

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

    Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    A. By order approve the proposed rule change; or
    B. institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

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-NYSEArca-2008-121 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2008-121. 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, 100 F Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours
of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; 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-NYSEArca-2008-121 and should
be submitted on or before December 19, 2008.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-28220 Filed 11-26-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: July 7, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 128)]
[Notices]
[Page 32143-32145]
[DOCID:fr07jy09-43]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

June 23, 2009.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG09-49-000.
    Applicants: Blackstone Wind Farm, LLC.
    Description: Supplement to Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt
Wholesale Generator Status of Blackstone Wind Farm, LLC.
    Filed Date: 06/19/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090619-5063.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, July 10, 2009.

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

    Docket Numbers: ER01-1403-010; ER01-2968-011; ER01-845-009; ER04-
366-008; ER05-1122-007; ER06-1443-006; ER08-107-004.
    Applicants: FirstEnergy Operating Companies, Pennsylvania Power
Company, Jersey Central Power & Light Co., FirstEnergy Solutions Corp.,
FirstEnergy Generation Corporation, FirstEnergy Nuclear Generation
Corporation, FirstEnergy Generation Mansfield Unit 1.
    Description: Supplement of FirstEnergy Service Company to Triennial
Market Power Update Analysis of FirstEnergy Operating Companies, et al.
    Filed Date: 06/17/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090617-5175.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, July 08, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER03-533-004; ER03-762-012.
    Applicants: Alliant Energy Corporate Services, Inc., Alliant Energy
Neenah, LLC.
    Description: Alliant Energy Corporate Services, Inc et al submits
revised application and market power study to replace those submitted
to the Commission on 1/5/08 & 5/14/09.
    Filed Date: 06/19/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090622-0167.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, July 10, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-283-003.
    Applicants: New York Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: New York Independent System Operator, Inc submits
response to request for additional information set forth in FERC 5/29/
09 deficiency letter.
    Filed Date: 06/19/2009.

    Accession Number: 20090622-0165.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, July 10, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-314-002.
    Applicants: Bicent (California) Malburg, LLC.
    Description: Bicent (California) Malburg, LLC submits FERC Electric
Tariff, Original Volume No 1, Substitute First Revised Sheet No 1 and
Sub First Revised Sheet No 2.
    Filed Date: 06/19/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090622-0164.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, July 10, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-580-002.
    Applicants: Ontario Power Generation Energy Trading, Inc.
    Description: Updated Market Power Study for Central (MISO) Region
of Ontario Power Generation Energy Trading, Inc.
    Filed Date: 06/23/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090623-5053.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, July 14, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-1410-003.
    Applicants: PacifiCorp.
    Description: PacifiCorp submits a compliance filing et al.
    Filed Date: 06/22/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090623-0082.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, July 13, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-241-002.
    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.
    Description: The California Independent System Operator Corporation
submits Substitute First Revised Sheet 538B et al. to FERC Electric
Tariff, Fourth Replacement Volume 1.
    Filed Date: 06/22/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090623-0078.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, July 13, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-865-001; ER09-866-001; ER00-814-007.
    Applicants: Allegheny Energy Supply Company, LLC.
    Description: Allegheny Energy Supply Company, LLC submits First
Revised Sheet 2 et al. to FERC Electric Tariff, Second Revised Volume
1, effective 6/1/09.
    Filed Date: 06/22/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090623-0079.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, July 13, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-1146-001.
    Applicants: Lafarge Midwest, Inc.
    Description: Lafarge Midwest, Inc submits supplemental information
to its application for market based rates, request for blanket
authorization, et al.
    Filed Date: 06/15/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090617-0003.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, July 06, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-1207-001.
    Applicants: P.H. Glatfelter Company.
    Description: PH Glatfelter Company submits Substitute Original
Sheet 1 et al. to FERC Electric Tariff, Original Volume 1, to be
effective 7/29/09.
    Filed Date: 06/22/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090623-0077.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, July 13, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-1314-000.
    Applicants: NorthWestern Corporation.
    Description: NorthWestern Corporation submits an amendment to its
Montana Open Access Transmission Tariff to add a new Schedule 10,
Regulation and Frequency Response Service for Intermittent Renewable
Generator Exports.
    Filed Date: 06/16/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090618-0114.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, July 07, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-1320-000.
    Applicants: Blackstone Wind Farm, LLC.
    Description: Blackstone Wind Farm, LLC submits petition for order
accepting market-based rate tariff for filing and granting waivers and
blanket approvals.
    Filed Date: 06/19/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090622-0194.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, July 10, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-1321-000.
    Applicants: Blue Canyon Windpower V, LLC.
    Description: Blue Canyon Windpower V, LLC submits petition for
order accepting market-based rate tariff for filing and granting
waivers and blanket approvals.
    Filed Date: 06/19/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090622-0195.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, July 10, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-1322-000.
    Applicants: Meadow Lake Wind Farm, LLC.
    Description: Meadow Lake Wind Farm, LLC submits petition for order
accepting market-based rate tariff for filing and granting waivers and
blanket approvals.
    Filed Date: 06/22/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090622-0196.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, July 13, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-1323-000.
    Applicants: Lost Lakes Wind Farm, LLC.
    Description: Lost Lakes Wind Farm, LLC submits petition for order
accepting market-based rate tariff for filing and granting waivers and
blanket approvals.
    Filed Date: 06/22/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090622-0197.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, July 13, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-1329-000.
    Applicants: NaturEner Power Watch, LLC.
    Description: NaturEner Power Watch, LLC submits executed Amended
and Restated Coordinated Operating Agreement.
    Filed Date: 06/19/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090622-0030.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, July 10, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-1330-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, LLC.
    Description: PJM Interconnection, LLC submits an executed
interconnection service agreement entered into among PJM, et al.
    Filed Date: 06/19/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090622-0029.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, July 10, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-1335-000.
    Applicants: Idaho Power Company.
    Description: Idaho Power Company submits revisions to the Agreement
for Interconnection and Transmission Services with Utah Power & Light
Company.
    Filed Date: 06/19/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090622-0125.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, July 10, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-1336-000.
    Applicants: Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Pacific Gas and Electric Company submits an unexecuted
Large Generator Interconnection Agreement for the interconnection of
PG&E's replacement generation facilities at the Humboldt Bay Re-
Powering Project.
    Filed Date: 06/22/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090622-0186.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, July 13, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-1337-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Southern California Edison Company submits Third
Revised Sheet 7 et al. to FERC Electric Tariff, First Revised Volume 5.
    Filed Date: 06/22/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090623-0081.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, July 13, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-1338-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Southwest Power Pool, Inc submits First Revised Sheet
1039 et

al. to FERC Electric Tariff, Fifth Revised Volume 1 to its Open Access
Transmission Tariff, to be effective 8/21/09.
    Filed Date: 06/22/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090623-0080.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, July 13, 2009.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. 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. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://
www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also 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>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-15865 Filed 7-6-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: July 6, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 128)]
[Notices]
[Page 38862-38863]
[DOCID:fr06jy10-117]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket No. FRA-2010-0005-N-15]

Notice and Request for Comments

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this notice announces that the Information
Collection Requirements (ICRs) abstracted below have been forwarded to
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comment. The
ICRs describe the nature of the information collections and their
expected burdens. The Federal Register notice with a 60-day comment
period soliciting comments on the following collections of information
was published on April 21, 2010 (75 FR 20875).

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before August 5, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Robert Brogan, Office of Safety,
Planning and Evaluation Division, RRS-21, Federal Railroad
Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE., Mail Stop 17, Washington, DC
20590 (telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>), or Ms. Kimberly Toone, Office of
Information Technology, RAD-20, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200
New Jersey Ave., SE., Mail Stop 35, Washington, DC 20590 (telephone:
(202) 493-6132). (These telephone numbers are not toll-free.)

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA),
Public Law 104-13, Section 2, 109 Stat. 163 (1995) (codified as revised
at 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), and its implementing regulations, 5 CFR part
1320, require Federal agencies to issue two notices seeking public
comment on information collection activities before OMB may approve
paperwork packages. 44 U.S.C. 3506, 3507; 5 CFR 1320.5, 1320.8(d)(1),
1320.12. On April 21, 2010, FRA published a 60-day notice in the
Federal Register soliciting comment on ICRs that the agency was seeking
OMB approval. 75 FR 20875. FRA received no comments after issuing this
60-day notice. Accordingly, DOT announces that these information
collection activities have been re-evaluated and certified under 5 CFR
1320.5(a) and forwarded to OMB for review and approval pursuant to 5
CFR 1320.12(c).
    Before OMB decides whether to approve these proposed collections of
information, it must provide 30 days for public comment. 44 U.S.C.
3507(b); 5 CFR 1320.12(d). Federal law requires OMB to approve or
disapprove paperwork packages between 30 and 60 days after the 30 day
notice is published. 44 U.S.C. 3507 (b)-(c); 5 CFR 1320.12(d); see also
60 FR 44978, 44983, Aug. 29, 1995. OMB believes that the 30 day notice
informs the regulated community to file relevant comments and affords
the agency adequate time to digest public comments before it renders a
decision. 60 FR 44983, Aug. 29, 1995. Therefore, respondents should
submit their respective comments to OMB within 30 days of publication
to best ensure having their full effect. 5 CFR 1320.12(c); see also 60
FR 44983, Aug. 29, 1995.
    The summaries below describe the nature of the information
collection requirements (ICRs) and the expected burden. The revised
requirements are being submitted for clearance by OMB as required by
the PRA.
    Title: Filing of Dedicated Cars.
    OMB Control Number: 2130-0502.
    Type of Request: Extension without change of a currently approved
collection.
    Affected Public: Railroads.
    Abstract: Title 49, part 215 of the Code of Federal Regulations,
prescribes certain conditions to be followed for the movement of
freight cars that are not in compliance with this part. Dedicated
service means the exclusive assignment of railroad cars to the
transportation of freight between specified points under the following
conditions: (1) The cars are operated primarily on track that is inside
an industrial or other non-railroad installation; and only occasionally
over track of a railroad; (2) The cars are not operated at speeds of
more than 15 miles per hour; and over track of a railroad--(A) for more
than 30 miles in one direction; or (B) on a round trip for more than 60
miles; (3) The cars are not freely interchanged among railroads; (4)
The words ``Dedicated Service'' are stenciled, or otherwise displayed,
in clear legible letters on each side of the car body; and (5) The cars
have been examined and found safe to operate in dedicated service.
These cars must be identified in a written report to FRA before they
are assigned to dedicated service, and these reports must be filed with
FRA 30 days before the cars operate in dedicated service. FRA uses the
information collected under Sec.  215.5(d) to determine the number of
railroads affected, the number and type of cars involved, the
commodities being carried, and the territorial and speed limits within
which the cars will be operated. FRA reviews these reports to determine
if the equipment is safe to operate and if the operation qualifies for
dedicated service. The information collected indicates to FRA
inspectors that the particular or ``dedicated'' car is in special
service and that certain exceptions have been provided for regarding
the application of this regulation spelled out in Sec.  215.3. Cars not
in compliance with Sec.  215.5(d) will be cited for violations by FRA
inspectors. The information collected is also used by railroads to
provide identification and control so that dedicated cars remain in the
prescribed service.
    Form Number(s): N/A.
    Annual Estimated Burden Hours: 4 hours.
    Title: Hours of Service Regulations.
    OMB Control Number: 2130-0005.
    Type of Request: Extension without change of a currently approved
collection.
    Affected Public: Railroads.
    Abstract: The collection of information is due to the railroad
hours of service regulations set forth in 49 CFR part 228 which require
railroads to collect the hours of duty for covered employees, and
records of train movements. Railroads whose employees have exceeded
maximum duty limitations must report the circumstances. Also, a
railroad that has developed plans for construction or reconstruction of
sleeping quarters (subpart C of 49 CFR part 228) must obtain approval
of the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) by filing a petition
conforming to the requirements of Sections 228.101, 228.103, and
228.105.
    Form Number(s): FRA F 6180.3.
    Annual Estimated Burden Hours: 3,707,346 hours.

ADDRESSES: Send comments regarding these information collections to the
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and
Budget, 725 Seventeenth Street, NW., Washington, DC, 20503, Attention:
FRA Desk Officer. Alternatively, comments may be sent via e-mail to the
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs

(OIRA), Office of Management and Budget, at the following address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Comments are invited on the following: Whether the proposed
collections of information are necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the Department, including whether the information will
have practical utility; the accuracy of the Department's estimates of
the burden of the proposed information collections; ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
ways to minimize the burden of the collections of information on
respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
    A comment to OMB is best assured of having its full effect if OMB
receives it within 30 days of publication of this notice in the Federal
Register.

    Authority:  44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on June 29, 2010.
Kimberly Coronel,
Director, Office of Financial Management, Federal Railroad
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2010-16339 Filed 7-2-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P