[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 101 (Friday, May 26, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24345-24346]
[FR Doc No: 2017-10933]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OW-2016-0686; FRL-9962-62-OW]

EPA's Proposed Modeling Approaches for a Health-Based Benchmark
for Lead in Drinking Water--Final List of Peer Reviewers, Final Charge
Questions and Notice of the Public Peer Review Meeting

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of final peer reviewer selection and public peer review
meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is announcing
the final peer reviewers assembled by Eastern Research Group, Inc.,
(ERG) for the external peer review of EPA's ``Proposed Modeling
Approaches for a Health-Based Benchmark for Lead in Drinking Water''
(lead modeling report).

DATES: The public peer review meeting will be held on:
    1. June 27, 2017, 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., eastern standard time; and
    2. June 28, 2017, 8:30 a.m. to 2 p.m., eastern standard time.

    The registration deadline to attend the meeting in-person or via
teleconference, and to request to make a brief oral statement at the
meeting, is June 22, 2017. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
for instructions of how to register.

ADDRESSES: The public peer review meeting will be held at the St.
Gregory Hotel, located at 2033 M Street NW., Washington, DC. The phone
number for the teleconference line will be provided to registered
observers prior to the meeting.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Questions regarding logistics or
registration for the external peer review meeting should be directed to
ERG, 110 Hartwell Avenue, Lexington, MA 02421; by email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(subject line: Lead in Drinking Water Peer Review);
or by phone:<PHONE_NUMBER> (ask for Laurie Waite).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Registration Instructions

    To attend the peer review meeting as an observer, either in-person
or via teleconference, register no later than June 22, 2017. You may
register (1) online at https://projects.erg.com/conferences/peerreview/register-lead-drinkwater.htm; (2) by sending an email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(subject line: Lead in Drinking Water Peer Review
Meeting) and include your name, title and affiliation, full address,
email and phone number, or (3) by phone at<PHONE_NUMBER> (ask for
Laurie Waite). Please indicate which day(s) you plan to attend the
meeting and whether you plan to attend the meeting via teleconference
or in-person. Space is limited and registrations will be accepted on a
first-come, first-served basis. There will be a limited amount of time
for oral statements from the public at the beginning of the peer review
meeting on the first day. If you wish to make an oral statement during
the meeting, you must notify ERG of your request to speak by
registering no later than June 22, 2017. ERG will accept requests to
make oral statements on a first-come, first-served basis, and may limit
the amount of time for each speaker as well as the number of speakers
due to time constraints. ERG will notify speakers of specific time
limits for their oral statements prior to the meeting.

II. Information on the Draft Lead Modeling Report and Peer Review
Charge Questions

    EPA announced the release of the draft lead modeling report and
draft peer review charge questions for purposes of public comment on
January 19, 2017, in the Federal Register (82 FR 6546). The original
45-day public comment period ended on March 6, 2017, but the public
comment period was extended 30 days to April 5, 2017, due to
stakeholders' request. EPA will consider peer reviewer and public
comments when finalizing the draft lead modeling report. EPA also
obtained public comment on the draft peer review charge questions. The
final charge questions, the draft lead modeling report and public
comments submitted during the public comment period may be viewed at
https://www.regulations.gov. (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2016-0686).

III. Final List of Peer Reviewers

    Consistent with guidelines for the peer review of highly
influential scientific assessments, EPA tasked ERG, a contractor, to
assemble a panel of experts to evaluate the draft lead modeling report.
ERG received 14 nominations in response to EPA's January 19, 2017,
Federal Register notice (82 FR 6546) requesting nominations and
identified over 40 additional potential candidates through its own
search process. From this set, a total of 26 experts responded to ERG
to indicate their interest in and qualifications for this review. After
evaluating these 26 individuals against the selection criteria
described in the Federal Register notice, ERG identified an interim
list of 13 qualified candidates. EPA solicited public comments on the
interim list on March 20, 2017, in the Federal Register (82 FR 14361).
ERG considered the public comments received and consulted with EPA's
Science Integrity Official. Considering all these inputs, ERG selected
8 final peer reviewers who, collectively, best meet EPA's selection
criteria, provide expertise spanning the multiple subject matter areas
covered by the draft lead modeling report, and to the extent feasible,
best provide a balance of perspectives. The final 8 selected peer
reviewers are provided as follows.

Name of Peer Reviewer, Degree, Place of Employment

1. Panos Georgopoulos, Ph.D., Rutgers University
2. Philip Goodrum, Ph.D., Integral Consulting, Inc.
3. Ian von Lindern, Ph.D., TerraGraphics International
4. Anne Loccisano, Ph.D., Exponent, Inc.
5. Marc A. Nascarella, Ph.D., Massachusetts Department of Public Health
6. Mich[egrave]le Pr[eacute]vost, Ph.D., Polytechnique Montreal
7. P. Barry Ryan, Ph.D., Emory University
8. Kathleen Vork, Ph.D., California Office of Environment Health Hazard
Assessment

    EPA requests that no individual or organization in any way contact
the peer reviewers regarding the subject of the peer review meeting,
send them written materials regarding the subject of the meeting, or
make any offers or requests to any of them that appear to be linked to
their participation in the peer review. ERG will direct the reviewers
to report any such contacts directly to ERG, and take appropriate
action in consultation with EPA to ensure the independence and
impartiality of the peer review.

IV. Information About the Peer Review Meeting

    EPA has charged the peer reviewers with evaluating and preparing
written comments on the draft lead modeling report. Specifically,
reviewers will work individually to provide general comments, their
overall impressions of the draft lead modeling report, and responses to
the charge questions. Reviewers will also consider the appropriateness
of the quality, accuracy, and relevance of the data in the lead
modeling report. Prior to the meeting, ERG will provide the peer
    reviewers with a summary of the public comments (along with the
full text of all comments) on the draft lead modeling report and peer
review charge questions that were submitted to EPA's public docket
(Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2016-0686) during the public comment period.

    Dated: May 8, 2017.
Michael H. Shapiro,
Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of Water.
[FR Doc. 2017-10933 Filed 5-25-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 200 (Wednesday, October 18, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 71853-71854]
[FR Doc No: 2023-22996]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0720; FRL-11374-01-OCSPP]

Pesticide Registration Review; Pesticide Dockets Opened for
Review and Comment; Notice of Availability

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of the EPA's
preliminary work plans for the following chemicals: Aureobasidium
pullulans and cyflumetofen. With this document, the EPA is opening the
public comment period for registration review for these chemicals.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 18, 2023.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0720, through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions
for submitting comments. Do not submit electronically any information
you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Additional
instructions on commenting and visiting the docket, along with more
information about dockets generally, is available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For pesticide specific information,
contact: The Chemical Review Manager for the pesticide of interest
identified in Table 1 in Unit IV.
    For general questions on the registration review program, contact:
Melanie Biscoe, Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division (7508P), Office of
Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action is directed to the public in general and may be of
interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human
health, farm worker, and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry;
pesticide users; and members of the public interested in the sale,
distribution, or use of pesticides. Since others also may be
interested, the agency has not attempted to describe all the specific
entities that may be affected by this action. If you have any questions
regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity,
consult the Chemical Review Manager identified in Table 1 in Unit IV.

B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for the EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to the EPA
through regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to the EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM
as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When preparing and submitting
your comments, see the commenting tips at https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
    3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to achieve environmental
justice, the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of any group,
including minority and/or low-income populations, in the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies. To help address potential environmental justice issues, the
Agency seeks information on any groups or segments of the population
who, as a result of their location, cultural practices, or other
factors, may have atypical or disproportionately high and adverse human
health impacts or environmental effects from exposure to the pesticides
discussed in this document, compared to the general population.

II. Background

    Registration review is the EPA's periodic review of pesticide
registrations to ensure that each pesticide continues to satisfy the
statutory standard for registration, that is, the pesticide can perform
its

intended function without unreasonable adverse effects on human health
or the environment. Registration review dockets contain information
that will assist the public in understanding the types of information
and issues that the agency may consider during registration reviews. As
part of the registration review process, the Agency has completed
preliminary workplans for all pesticides listed in Table 1 in Unit IV.
EPA initiates a registration review by establishing a public docket for
a pesticide registration review case. The docket contains a Preliminary
Work Plan (PWP) summarizing information EPA has on the pesticide and
the anticipated path forward. Through this program, the EPA is ensuring
that each pesticide's registration is based on current scientific and
other knowledge, including its effects on human health and the
environment.

III. Authority

    The EPA is conducting its registration review of the chemicals
listed in Table 1 in Unit IV pursuant to section 3(g) of the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Procedural
Regulations for Registration Review at 40 CFR part 155, subpart C.
Section 3(g) of FIFRA provides, among other things, that the
registrations of pesticides are to be reviewed every 15 years. Under
FIFRA, a pesticide product may be registered or remain registered only
if it meets the statutory standard for registration given in FIFRA
section 3(c)(5) (7 U.S.C. 136a(c)(5)). When used in accordance with
widespread and commonly recognized practice, the pesticide product must
perform its intended function without unreasonable adverse effects on
the environment; that is, without any unreasonable risk to man or the
environment, or a human dietary risk from residues that result from the
use of a pesticide in or on food.

IV. Registration Reviews

A. What action is the agency taking?

    Pursuant to 40 CFR 155.50, this notice announces the availability
of the EPA's preliminary work plans for the pesticides shown in Table 1
and opens a 60-day public comment period on the work plans.

                     Table 1--Preliminary Work Plans Being Made Available for Public Comment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Chemical review manager
 Registration review case name and No.                   Docket ID No.                  and contact information
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aureobasidium pullulans................  EPA-HQ-OPP-2023-0064........................  Susanne Cerrelli,
Case No. 6521..........................                                                 [email protected]
<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Cyflumetofen...........................  EPA-HQ-OPP-2022-0194........................  Susan Bartow,
Case No. 7463..........................                                                 [email protected]
<PHONE_NUMBER>.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Docket Content

    The registration review docket contains information that the agency
may consider in the course of the registration review. The agency may
include information from its files including, but not limited to, the
following information:
 An overview of the registration review case status.
 A list of current product registrations and registrants.
 Federal Register notices regarding any pending registration
actions.
 Federal Register notices regarding current or pending
tolerances.
 Risk assessments.
 Bibliographies concerning current registrations.
 Summaries of incident data.
 Any other pertinent data or information.
    Each docket contains a document summarizing what the agency
currently knows about the pesticide case and a preliminary work plan
for anticipated data and assessment needs. Additional documents provide
more detailed information. During this public comment period, the
agency is asking that interested persons identify any additional
information they believe the agency should consider during the
registration reviews of these pesticides. The agency identifies in each
docket the areas where public comment is specifically requested, though
comment in any area is welcome.
    The registration review final rule at 40 CFR 155.50(b) provides for
a minimum 60-day public comment period on all preliminary registration
review work plans. This comment period is intended to provide an
opportunity for public input and a mechanism for initiating any
necessary changes to a pesticide's workplan. All comments should be
submitted using the methods in ADDRESSES and must be received by the
EPA on or before the closing date. These comments will become part of
the docket for the pesticides included in Table 1 in Unit IV. Comments
received after the close of the comment period will be marked ``late.''
The EPA is not required to consider these late comments.
    The agency will carefully consider all comments received by the
closing date and may provide a ``Response to Comments Memorandum'' in
the docket. The final registration review work plan will explain the
effect that any comments had on the final work plan and provide the
agency's response to significant comments.
    Background on the registration review program is provided at:
https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-reevaluation.
    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.

    Dated: October 13, 2023.
Mary Elissa Reaves,
Director, Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division, Office of Pesticide
Programs.
[FR Doc. 2023-22996 Filed 10-17-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 31 (Wednesday, February 17, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 7978-7980]
[FR Doc No: 2016-03108]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R07-OAR-2016-0045; FRL-9942-37-Region 7]

Approval of Iowa's Air Quality Implementation Plans; Polk County
Board of Health Rules and Regulations, Chapter V, Revisions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving
revisions to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the State of Iowa.
The purpose of these revisions is to update the Polk County Board of
Health Rules and Regulations, Chapter V, Air Pollution. The revisions
reflect updates to the Iowa statewide rules previously approved by EPA
and will ensure consistency between the applicable local agency rules
and Federally-approved rules.

DATES: This direct final rule will be effective April 18, 2016, without
further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by March 18, 2016.
If EPA receives adverse comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal of
the direct final rule in the Federal Register informing the public that
the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-
OAR-2016-0045, to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment
received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the Web, cloud, or other
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA
public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions,
and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Heather Hamilton, Environmental
Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner
Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' or
``our'' refer to EPA. This section provides additional information by
addressing the following:

    I. What is being addressed in this document?
    II. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been
met?
    III. What action is EPA taking?

I. What is being addressed in this document?

    The State of Iowa has requested EPA approval of revisions to the
local agency's rules and regulations, Chapter V, Air Pollution, as a
revision to the SIP. In order for the local program's Air Pollution
rules to be incorporated into the Federally-enforceable SIP, on behalf
of the local agency, the state must submit the formally adopted
regulations and control strategies, which are consistent with the state
and Federal requirements, to EPA for inclusion in the SIP. The
regulation adoption process generally includes public notice, a public
comment period and a public hearing, and formal adoption of the rule by
the state authorized rulemaking body. In this case, that rulemaking
body is the local agency. After the local agency formally adopts the
rule, the local agency submits the rulemaking to the state, and then
the state submits the rulemaking to EPA for consideration for formal
action (inclusion of the rulemaking into the SIP). EPA must provide
public notice and seek additional public comment regarding the proposed
Federal action on the state's submission.
    EPA received the request from the state to adopt revisions to the
local air agency rules into the SIP on December 8, 2015. The revisions
were adopted by the local agency on October 6, 2015, and became
effective on October 12, 2015. EPA is approving the requested revisions
to the Iowa SIP relating to the following:
     Article I. In General, Section 5-1. Purpose and Ambient
Air Quality Standards;
     Article I. In General, Section 5-2. Definitions;
     Article X. Permits, Division 1. Construction Permits,
Section 5-33. Exemptions from Permit Requirements;
     Article X. Permits, Division 2. Operating Permits, Section
5-39. Exemptions from Permit Requirement.

EPA's action does not cover revisions to:

     Article VI. Emission of Air Contaminants from Industrial
Processes, New Source Performance Standards, Section 5-16(n),
     Article VIII. National Emission Standards for Hazardous
Air Pollutants for Source Categories, Section 5-16(p), and,
     Article VIII. National Emission Standards for Hazardous
Air Pollutants for Source Categories, Section 5-20.
    EPA is also approving the definition of Maximum Achievable Control
Technology that was inadvertently omitted from the January 12, 2015,
Federal Register notice that approved the September 2013 revisions to
the Polk County Board of Health Rules and Regulations, Chapter V, Air
Pollution. 80 FR 1471.

II. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?

    The state submission has met the public notice requirements for SIP
submissions in accordance with 40 CFR 51.102. The submission also
satisfied

the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. In addition,
as explained previously and in more detail in the technical support
document which is part of this docket, the revision meets the
substantive SIP requirements of the CAA, including section 110 and
implementing regulations.

III. What action is EPA taking?

    We are taking direct final action to approve the revisions to the
Polk County Board of Health Rules and Regulations, Chapter V, Air
Pollution. The local agency routinely revises its Air Pollution
regulations to be consistent with the Federally-approved Iowa
Administrative Code.
    The local agency's Air Pollution rules are consistent with state
and Federal regulations and are revised as follows:
    Article I, section 5-1(c) is revised to cite the cross reference to
state-approved rules at (455B). The definition ``Responsible official''
was added to article I, section 5-2, the definition for ``Volatile
Organic Compounds'' was revised to cite the most recent federal
reference.
    Article X, division 1, Construction Permits, section 5-33,
Exemptions from Permit Requirements, and article X, division 2,
Operating Permits, section 5-39, Exemptions from Permit Requirements,
were revised to add an introductory paragraph stating that the
permitting exemptions of these sections do not relieve the owner or
operator of any source from any obligation to comply with any other
applicable requirements.
    Article X, division 1, Construction Permits, section 5-33,
Exemptions from Permit Requirements, and article X, division 2,
Operating Permits, section 5-39, Exemptions from Permit Requirements,
were revised to add recordkeeping requirements to the exemption for
electric hand soldering, wave soldering and electric solder paste
reflow ovens, and the exemption for emissions from mobile internal
combustion engines at equipment repair shops or equipment dealerships
was revised to add emissions from over-the-road trucks.
    Article X, division 1, Construction Permits, section 5-33,
Exemptions from Permit Requirements, and article X, division 2,
Operating Permits, section 5-39, Exemptions from Permit Requirements,
were revised to add three additional exemptions as follows: Equipment
that is not related to the production of goods or services and used
exclusively for academic purposes, located at educational institutions
as defined in Iowa Code section 455B.161; any container, storage tank,
or vessel that contains fluid having a maximum true vapor pressure of
less than 0.75 psia, and fugitive dust emissions related to movement of
passenger vehicles on unpaved road surfaces. Details of the three
additional exemptions and other Polk County revisions can be found in
the Technical Support Document in the docket of this rulemaking.
    With this SIP action, EPA is also approving the definition of
Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT). The MACT definition was
included in the September 2013 SIP submission for Polk County; however,
EPA inadvertently omitted the definition from the Federal Register
notice. 80 FR 1471, January 12, 2015. The definition of MACT is
consistent with the Federally-approved Iowa SIP.
    We are publishing this rule without a prior proposed rule because
we view this as a noncontroversial action and anticipate no adverse
comment because the revisions are largely administrative and consistent
with Federal regulations. However, in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of
today's Federal Register, we are publishing a separate document that
will serve as the proposed rule to approve the SIP revision if adverse
comments are received on this direct final rule. We will not institute
a second comment period on this action. Any parties interested in
commenting must do so at this time. For further information about
commenting on this rule, see the ADDRESSES section of this document. If
EPA receives adverse comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal in
the Federal Register informing the public that this direct final rule
will not take effect. We will address all public comments in any
subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule.

Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the Iowa
Regulations described in the direct final amendments to 40 CFR part 52
set forth below. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these
documents generally available electronically through
www.regulations.gov and at the appropriate EPA office (see the
ADDRESSES section of this preamble for more information).

Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does
not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides

that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule
must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each
House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United
States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by April 18, 2016. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    Dated: February 1, 2016.
Mark Hague,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
    For the reasons stated in the preamble, EPA amends 40 CFR part 52
as set forth below:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart Q--Iowa

0
2. Amend Sec.  52.820(c) by revising in the table under ``Polk County''
the entry for ``Chapter V'' to read as follows:

Sec.  52.820  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                          Epa-Approved Iowa Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             State
          Iowa citation                    Title           effective     EPA approval date       Explanation
                                                             date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Iowa Department of Natural Resources Environmental Protection Commission [567]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Polk County
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER V........................  Polk County Board of     10/12/15   2/17/16, [Insert      Article I, Section
                                    Health Rules and                    Federal Register      5-2, definition of
                                    Regulations Air                     citation].            ``variance,''
                                    Pollution Chapter V.                                      ``anaerobic
                                                                                lagoon,'' and
                                                                                ``greenhouse
                                                                                gases''; Article
                                                                                III, Incineration
                                                                                and Open Burning,
                                                                                Section 5-7(d)
                                                                                Variance
                                                                                Application;
                                                                                Article VI,
                                                                                Sections 5-16(n),
                                                                                (o) and (p);
                                                                                Article VIII;
                                                                                Article IX,
                                                                                Sections 5-27(3)
                                                                                and (4); Article
                                                                                X, Section 5-28,
                                                                                subsections (a)
                                                                                through (c), and
                                                                                Article X, Section
                                                                                5-35(b)(5);
                                                                                Article XIII; and
                                                                                Article XVI,
                                                                                Section 5-75 are
                                                                                not part of the
                                                                                SIP.
                                                                                Article VI, Section
                                                                                5-17, adopted by
                                                                                Polk County on 7/
                                                                                26/2011, is not
                                                                                part of the SIP,
                                                                                and the previously
                                                                                approved version
                                                                                of Article VI,
                                                                                Section 5-17
                                                                                remains part of
                                                                                the SIP.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016-03108 Filed 2-16-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


 Forwarded by Amanda I. Lee/ OMB/ EOP on 07/ 02/ 2004 02: 02 PM

( Embedded image moved Allen Jennings < Allen. Jennings@ usda. gov> to file: 07/ 02/ 2004 01: 28: 00 PM pic16091. pcx)

Record Type: Record To: Amanda I. Lee/ OMB/ EOP@ EOP cc:

"/ DDV= ARS HQ:[ usda. gov]( burleson. smith)/ DDT= wpm/ OU= ARS DC/ O= ARS/ P= GOV+ USDA/ A= ATTMAIL/ C= US/"

<"/ DDV= ARS HQ# c## 091# usda. gov# 093## l# burleson. smith# r#/ DDT= wpm/ OU= ARS DC/ O= ARS/ P= GOV+ USDA/ A= ATTMAIL/ C= US/"@ hq. usda. gov>

( Receipt Notification Requested) Subject: Re: comments to informal draft of methyl bromide reproposal Amanda,

Attached ( and below) are my comments. Burleson may have some to add but he is tied up on another matter until later today.

Al USDA Comments on the Draft Allocation Rule 1) Penalties: While we appreciate EPA* s efforts to lower the potential maximum penalty by basing violations on a * per 50 kg* basis rather a * per 1 kg* basis, the proposed maximum is still excessive for most, if not all, agricultural operations. We believe that an effective deterrent to misapplication can be achieved with a much lower maximum penalty that would also avoid creating a negative reaction within the agricultural community. A maximum penalty of $ 195,000/ acre as outlined in the draft will almost certainly draw the ire of many methyl bromide users and it is not at all clear that additional animosity will help achieve EPA* s goals. This seems especially the case given that non CUE users can, in the short term, purchase and use MeBr from existing stocks with no limitations or potential penalty.

2) Available Stocks: Because of the CBI nature of the data that drive the calculation, we cannot comment on the data and assumptions used in the algorithm. Given likely uncertainties in the data, we encourage EPA to factor uncertainty into the calculation and present a range. The policy choice of a single cap number within that range should then be made clear.

>>> Amanda_ I._ Lee@ omb. eop. gov@ INTER2 06/ 23/ 04 05: 08PM >>>

 Forwarded by Amanda I. Lee/ OMB/ EOP on 06/ 23/ 2004 05: 07 PM

Amanda I. Lee 06/ 23/ 2004 05: 00: 38 PM Record Type: Record To: See the distribution list at the bottom of this message cc: Arthur G. Fraas/ OMB/ EOP@ EOP, land. tom@ epa. gov, finman. hodayah@ epa. gov Subject: comments to informal draft of methyl bromide reproposal Hi all,

Given the timing of the reproposal, it would be helpful to EPA if we can give them comments on the informal draft. Please get me your comments by COB next Friday ( July 2nd) to be forwarded to EPA. Thanks,

Amanda Message Sent To:_____________________________________________________________

ThompsonJE2@ state. gov @ inet Burleson. Smith@ usda. gov @ inet Jennings. Al@ usda. gov @ inet jprescott@ ustr. gov @ inet David van Hoogstraten/ CEQ/ EOP@ Exchange Ted Gayer/ CEA/ EOP@ Exchange


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 59 (Monday, March 28, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 17204-17206]
[FR Doc No: 2022-06390]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2022-0293; Project Identifier MCAI-2021-01125-G]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Alexander Schleicher GmbH & Co.
Segelflugzeugbau Gliders

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 75-
23-03, which applies to all Alexander Schleicher GmbH & Co.
Segelflugzeugbau (Alexander Schleicher) Model Ka2B, Ka 6, Ka 6 B, Ka 6
BR, Ka 6 C, Ka 6 CR, K 7, K 8, and AS-K 13 gliders. AD 75-23-03
requires visually inspecting the glue joint between the elevator nose
rib number 1 and the nose plywood skin and replacing the glue joint if
insufficient glue adhesion is found. Since the FAA issued AD 75-23-03,
the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) superseded prior EASA
ADs for the unsafe condition on these products. This proposed AD would
add the Model K 8 B gliders to the applicability and would require
repetitively inspecting the glue joint at elevator rib number 1 and
repairing any damage found. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the
unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by May 12,
2022.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Alexander
Schleicher GmbH & Co. Segelflugzeugbau, Alexander-Schleicher-Str. 1,
Poppenhausen, Germany D-36163; phone: +49 (0) 06658 89-0; email:
[email protected]; website: https://www.alexander-schleicher.de. You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 901 Locust,
Kansas City, MO 64106. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2022-0293; or in person at
Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this NPRM, the MCAI,
any comments received, and other information. The street address for
Docket Operations is listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim Rutherford, Aviation Safety
Engineer, General Aviation & Rotorcraft Section, International
Validation Branch, FAA, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, MO 64106;
phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2022-0293; Project Identifier
MCAI-2021-01125-G'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
the proposal because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact received about this NPRM.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Jim
Rutherford, Aviation Safety Engineer, General Aviation & Rotorcraft
Section, International Validation Branch, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas
City, MO 64106. Any commentary that the FAA receives which is not
specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for
this rulemaking.

Background

    The FAA issued AD 75-23-03, Amendment 39-2414 (40 FR 50706, October
31, 1975) (AD 75-23-03) for all Alexander Schleicher Model Ka2B, Ka 6,
Ka 6 B, Ka 6 BR, Ka 6 C, Ka 6 CR, K 7, K 8, and AS-K 13 gliders. AD 75-
23-03 was prompted by mandatory continuing airworthiness information
(MCAI) originated by Luftfahrt-Bundesamt (LBA), which, at the time, was
the airworthiness authority for Germany. AD 75-23-03 requires a one-
time inspection of the glue joint at elevator rib number 1 for glue
adhesion and repair if necessary.

Actions Since AD 75-23-03 Was Issued

    Since the FAA issued AD 75-23-03, EASA, which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, superseded LBA's
prior AD on this unsafe condition and issued EASA AD 2021-0230, dated
October 14, 2021, (referred to after this as ``the MCAI''), for
Alexander Schleicher GmbH & Co. Segelflugzeugbau Model AS-K 13, ASK 16,
ASK 16B, ASK 18, ASK 18 B, K 8, K 8 B, K 8 C, K 7, Ka 6, Ka 6 B, Ka 6
BR, Ka 6 C, Ka 6 CR, and Ka \6/0\ sailplanes (gliders). The MCAI
states:

    An occurrence was reported of structural failure of an elevator
during winch launching of a K 7 sailplane. Subsequent investigation
results determined that the occurrence was due to damaged glue of
the elevator's rib No. 1.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could affect the
structural integrity of an elevator, possibly resulting in reduced
control of the aeroplane.
    To address this potential unsafe condition, Schleicher issued
the glued joint inspection TN [Technical Note], as defined in this
[EASA] AD, to provide inspection instructions and LBA Germany issued
AD 72-7 (later revised) to require those actions.
    Since that [LBA Germany] AD was issued, additional similar
occurrences were reported of structural elevator failure, also on

(powered) sailplanes originally not affected by LBA 72-7/3. Prompted
by this development, Schleicher issued the applicable TN, providing
inspections instructions for all (powered) sailplanes having an
elevator of a similar design and making the inspections dependent
also on the number of take-offs.
    For the reason described above, this [EASA] AD supersedes LBA
Germany AD 72-7/3 [dated December 13, 1989] and requires repetitive
inspections of the elevator and, depending on findings,
accomplishment of applicable corrective action(s).

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2022-
0293.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed Alexander Schleicher GmbH & Co. Segelflugzeugbau
Appendix 01-2021, Flight and Operating Manual, dated March 1, 2021.
This service information specifies procedures for protecting the glider
from moisture and repetitively inspecting the glue joint between
elevator rib number 1 and the plywood skin.
    This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to the FAA's bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority,
it has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI
and service information referenced above. The FAA is issuing this NPRM
after determining the unsafe condition described previously is likely
to exist or develop on other products of the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements in This NPRM

    This proposed AD would supersede AD 75-23-03 without retaining any
of its actions. This proposed AD would require repetitively inspecting
the glue joint between elevator rib number 1 and the plywood skin and
repairing if necessary. This proposed AD would also add Model K 8 B
gliders to the applicability.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the MCAI

    The MCAI applies to Model ASK 16, ASK 16B, ASK 18, ASK 18 B, K 8 C,
and Ka \6/0\ gliders and this proposed AD would not because they do not
have an FAA type certificate.
    This proposed AD would include the Model Ka2B glider whereas the
MCAI does not.
    Although the technical notes required by the MCAI specify to report
findings of damage to the manufacturer, this proposed AD would not
require that action.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD, if adopted as proposed, would
affect 83 gliders of U.S. registry. The FAA also estimates that it
would take 4 work-hours per glider to inspect the glue joint at
elevator rib number 1 and would require parts costing $50. The average
labor rate is $85 per work-hour.
    Based on these figures, the FAA estimates the cost on U.S.
operators to be $32,370 or $390 per glider, per inspection cycle.
    The FAA estimates that replacing the glue joint, if necessary,
would take 8 work-hours and would require parts costing $250 for an
estimated cost of $930 per glider. The FAA has no way of determining
the number of gliders that may need this action.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    The FAA determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Would not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Would not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by:
0
a. Removing Airworthiness Directive 75-23-03, Amendment 39-2414 (40 FR
50706, October 31, 1975), and
0
b. Adding the following new airworthiness directive:

Alexander Schleicher GmbH & Co. Segelflugzeugbau: Docket No. FAA-
2022-0293; Project Identifier MCAI-2021-01125-G.

 (a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) by May 12, 2022.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 75-23-03, Amendment 39-2414 (40 FR 50706,
October 31, 1975).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Alexander Schleicher GmbH & Co.
Segelflugzeugbau Model Ka2B, Ka 6, Ka 6 B, Ka 6 BR, Ka 6 C, Ka 6 CR,
K 7, K 8, K 8 B, and AS-K 13 gliders, all serial numbers,
certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 5521, Elevator,
Spar/Rib Structure.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of another
country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation
product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as structural
failure of an elevator during winch launching. The FAA is issuing
this AD to

prevent structural failure of an elevator, which could lead to loss
of glider control.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Actions

    Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD and
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 12 months or 500 flight
cycles, whichever occurs first, inspect the glue joint between
elevator rib number 1 and the plywood skin for damage by following
section 3 of Alexander Schleicher GmbH & Co. Segelflugzeugbau
Appendix 01-2021, Flight and Operating Manual, dated March 1, 2021.
For purposes of this AD, a flight cycle would be counted anytime the
glider launches and then lands. If there is any damage on the glue
joint, repair before further flight.

(h) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, International Validation Branch, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the manager of the International Validation Branch, send
it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (i)(1) of
this AD and email to: [email protected].
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

(i) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Jim Rutherford,
Aviation Safety Engineer, General Aviation & Rotorcraft Section,
International Validation Branch, FAA, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas
City, MO 64106; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
[email protected].
    (2) Refer to European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD
2021-0230, dated October 14, 2021, for related information. You may
examine the EASA AD in the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov
by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2022-0293.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Alexander Schleicher GmbH & Co. Segelflugzeugbau, Alexander-
Schleicher-Str. 1, Poppenhausen, Germany D-36163; phone: +49 (0)
06658 89-0; email: [email protected]; website: https://www.alexander-schleicher.de. You may view this service information
at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety
Branch, 901 Locust, Kansas City, MO 64106. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued on March 22, 2022.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-06390 Filed 3-25-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


			  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

		        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

			  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

			          WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation on April 5, 2004

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST 2000-7022

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________

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

Applicant:  AEROVIAS de MEXICO, S.A. de C.V.
                        Date Filed:  March 10, 2004

Relief requested:  Exemption from 49 USC section 41301 to permit the
applicant to continue to conduct scheduled, combination service between
Hermosillo, Mexico, and Las Vegas, Nevada.

If renewal, date and citation of last action:  April 14, 2003, in this
Docket.

Applicant representative:  William C. Evans,<PHONE_NUMBER>       DOT
analyst:  Allen F. Brown,<PHONE_NUMBER>

Responsive pleadings:  None.

	DISPOSITION

Action:  Approved.
                                           Action date:  April 5, 2004

Effective dates of authority granted:  April 5, 2004, through April 14,
2005.

Basis for approval (bilateral agreement/reciprocity):  United
States-Mexico Air Transport Services Agreement.

Except to the extent exempted/waived, this authority is subject to the
terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:  Standard exemption
conditions.

Special conditions/Remarks:

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director, Office of International
Aviation

________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________

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

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

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

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


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 173 (Wednesday, September 7, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55372-55373]
[FR Doc No: 2011-22811]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

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

    Docket Numbers: ER11-4051-001.
    Applicants: CSOLAR IV South, LLC.
    Description: CSOLAR IV South, LLC submits tariff filing per
35.17(b): Amendment to Application for Market-Based Rate Authorization
to be effective 9/11/2011.
    Filed Date: 08/30/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110830-5063.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, September 09, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-4200-000.
    Applicants: TC Ravenswood, LLC.
    Description: AMENDMENT TO MOTION OF TC RAVENSWOOD, LLC.
    Filed Date: 08/26/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110826-5052.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, September 16, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-4200-000.
    Applicants: TC Ravenswood, LLC.
    Description: AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO MOTION OF TC RAVENSWOOD, LLC.
    Filed Date: 08/26/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110826-5053.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, September 16, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-4394-000.
    Applicants: Snowflake White Mountain Power, LLC.
    Description: Snowflake White Mountain Power, LLC submits notice of
cancellation of its market based rate tariff and tariff ID.
    Filed Date: 08/29/2011.

    Accession Number: 20110830-0201.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, September 19, 2011.

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

    Dated: August 30, 2011.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-22811 Filed 9-6-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: November 30, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 228)]
[Notices]
[Page 62610-62612]
[DOCID:fr30no09-95]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 29062; File No. 812-13654]

Members Mutual Funds, et al.; Notice of Application

November 23, 2009.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').

ACTION: Notice of an application under section 6(c) of the Investment
Company Act of 1940 (the ``Act'') for an exemption from section 15(a)
of the Act and rule 18f-2 under the Act.

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

    Summary of Application: The requested order would permit certain
registered open-end management investment companies to enter into and
materially amend subadvisory agreements without shareholder approval.
    Applicants: Members Mutual Funds (``MMF''), Ultra Series Fund
(``USF'') and Madison Asset Management, LLC (``MAM'').

DATES: Filing Dates: The application was filed on April 16, 2009, and
amended on September 23, 2009 and November 23, 2009.
    Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An order granting the
application will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing.
Interested persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's
Secretary and serving applicants with a copy of the request, personally
or by mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by
5:30 p.m. on December 18, 2009 and should be accompanied by proof of
service on applicants, in the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a
certificate of service. Hearing requests should state the nature of the
writer's interest, the reasons for the request, and the issues
contested. Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing may request
notification by writing to the Commission's Secretary.

ADDRESSES: Secretary, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. Applicants, W. Richard Mason,
Esq., Corporate Counsel and CCO, Madison Asset Management, LLC c/o
Madison/Mosaic Legal and Compliance Department, 8777 N. Gainey Center
Drive, Suite 220, Scottsdale, AZ 85258.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laura L. Solomon, Senior Counsel at
(202) 551-6915, or Julia Kim Gilmer, Branch Chief, at<PHONE_NUMBER>
(Division of Investment Management, Office of Investment Company
Regulation).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is a summary of the
application. The complete application may be obtained via the
Commission's Web site by searching for the file number, or an applicant
using the Company name box, at http://www.sec.gov/search/search.htm or
by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Applicants' Representations

    1. MMF and USF are open-end management investment companies
registered under the Act. MMF is organized as a Delaware business
trust. USF is organized as a Massachusetts business trust. MMF is
currently comprised of 14 separate series and USF is currently
comprised of 18 separate series each of which has its own investment
objectives and policies (such series, together with the future series
of MMF and USF, the ``Funds,'' and each a ``Fund''). Applicants also
request relief with respect to current and future series of all
registered open-end management investment companies and their series
that are now, or in the future, advised by MAM or any entity
controlling, controlled by or under common control (within the meaning
of section 2(a)(9) of the Act) with MAM, or any successor to MAM
(collectively, the ``Adviser'') that comply with the terms and
conditions as set forth in the application and that

uses the services of one or more subadvisors to manage all or a portion
of their investment portfolios (the ``Management Structure,'' and such
companies and their series included in the term ``Funds''), as
described more fully in the application.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The term ``successor'' is limited to an entity or entities
that result from a reorganization into another jurisdiction or a
change in the type of business organization. Any existing entity
that currently intends to rely on the requested relief is named as
an applicant. If a Fund has the name of any investment subadvisor in
the Fund's name, the investment subadvisor's name will be preceded
by the name of the Adviser.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. MAM, a Wisconsin limited liability corporation, is registered as
an investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940
(``Advisers Act''). MAM provides overall investment management to MMF,
USF and each Fund, subject to the supervision of the board of directors
or trustees of each Fund (``Board'') pursuant to written agreements
(``Management Agreements'').\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Under a prior order, the Commission granted relief to
Members Capital Advisors, Inc. (``MCA'') (f/k/a CIMCO, Inc.) and MMF
from the provisions of section 15(a) of the Act and rule 18f-2 under
the Act, pursuant to which MCA retained investment subadvisors for
certain of the Funds. Members Mutual Funds and CIMCO, Inc.,
Investment Company Act Release Nos. 23365 (July 29, 1998) (notice)
and 23400 (August 25, 1998) (order) (``Existing Order''). On April
15, 2009, MCA, an indirectly wholly owned subsidiary of CUNA Mutual
Insurance Society (``CMIS'') and CMIS entered into an agreement
under which MAM would become the investment adviser to the Funds
(the ``Transaction''). The Transaction was approved by Fund
shareholders and MAM now serves as the Funds' investment adviser.
The Funds wish to continue to operate in a manner consistent with
the Existing Order. On June 30, 2009, MAM received a no-action
letter (Ref. No. 2009-3-1CR), permitting MAM to rely on the Existing
Order until the earlier of the receipt of any order granted by the
Commission on the application or December 30, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. The Management Agreements have been approved by a majority of
the trustees who are not ``interested persons,'' as defined in section
2(a)(19) of the Act, of the Board (the ``Independent Trustees'') and
Fund shareholders in the manner required by sections 15(a) and (c) of
the Act and rule 18f-2 under the Act. The Adviser will provide general
management services to each Fund, including overall supervisory
responsibility for the general management and investment of each Fund's
assets subject to review and approval of the Board. For the investment
management services the Adviser provides to the Funds, the Adviser will
receive fees at an annual rate based on each Fund's average net assets.
Each investment subadvisor will be recommended by the Adviser and
selected and approved by the Board, including a majority of the
Independent Trustees, and is (or will be) registered as an investment
adviser under the Advisers Act. Each investment subadvisor has
discretionary authority to invest all or a portion of the assets of a
particular Fund pursuant to a written investment subadvisory agreement
between the investment subadvisor and the Adviser. The fees of the
investment subadvisors are paid by the Adviser at rates negotiated with
the investment subadvisors by the Adviser and evaluated by the Board.
The Adviser will monitor the performance of each investment subadvisor
and of the Fund's portfolio and reallocate Fund assets among individual
investment subadvisors, or recommend to the Board that the Fund employ
or terminate particular investment subadvisors, to the extent the
Adviser deems appropriate to achieve the Fund's overall investment
objectives.
    4. Applicants request an order to eliminate the need for Funds to
submit new investment subadvisory agreements, and material amendments
to existing investment subadvisory agreements, to shareholders for
their approval. The requested relief will not extend to any investment
subadvisor who is an ``affiliated person,'' as defined in section
2(a)(3) of the Act, of the Funds or the Adviser (other than by reason
of serving as investment subadvisor to one or more Funds) (``affiliated
investment subadvisor''). Shareholder approval will continue to be
required for each investment subadvisory agreement with an affiliated
investment subadvisor.

Applicants' Legal Analysis

    1. Section 15(a) of the Act provides, in relevant part, that it is
unlawful for any person to act as an investment adviser to a registered
investment company except pursuant to a written contract that has been
approved by the vote of a majority of the company's outstanding voting
securities. Rule 18f-2 under the Act provides that each series or class
of stock in a series company affected by a matter must approve such
matter if the Act requires shareholder approval.
    2. Section 6(c) of the Act provides that the Commission may exempt
any person, security, or transaction or any class or classes of
persons, securities, or transactions from any provision of the Act, or
from any rule thereunder, if and to the extent that such exemption is
necessary or appropriate in the public interest and consistent with the
protection of investors and the purposes fairly intended by the policy
and provisions of the Act. Applicants believe that the requested relief
meets this standard.
    3. Applicants state that investors in any subadvised Fund are, in
effect, electing to have the Adviser select one or more investment
subadvisors best suited to achieve a Fund's investment objectives.
Applicants assert that, the role of the investment subadvisor, from the
perspective of the investor, is comparable to that of individual
portfolio managers employed by other investment company investment
advisory firms. Applicants contend that requiring shareholder approval
of investment subadvisory agreements would not serve the purpose
intended by the Act. Such requirements would place costs and burdens on
the Funds and their shareholders that would not advance such
shareholders' interests and would merely increase the Fund's expenses
and delay the prompt implementation of actions deemed advisable by the
Adviser and the Board. Applicants also note that the Management
Agreement between the Adviser and each of the Funds will be subject to
the shareholder approval requirements in section 15(a) and 15(c) of the
Act and rule 18f-2 under the Act.

Applicants' Conditions

    Applicants agree that any order granting the requested relief shall
be subject to the following conditions:
    1. The Adviser will provide general management services to each
Fund, including overall supervisory responsibility for the general
management and investment of each Fund's assets, and, subject to the
review and approval of the Board, will: (i) Set the overall investment
strategies of the Funds; (ii) evaluate, select and recommend investment
subadvisors to manage all or part of a Fund's assets; (iii) allocate
and, when appropriate, reallocate the assets of the Funds among
investment subadvisors in those cases where a Fund has more than one
investment subadvisor; (iv) monitor and evaluate the investment
performance of the investment subadvisors, including their compliance
with the investment objectives, policies and restrictions of the Funds;
and (v) implement procedures reasonably designed to ensure that the
investment subadvisors comply with the relevant Fund's investment
objective, policies and restrictions.
    2. Before any Fund may rely on the order requested in the
application, the operation of the Fund in the manner described in the
application will be approved by a majority of its outstanding voting
securities, as defined in the Act, or, in the case of a Fund

whose public shareholders purchase shares on the basis of a prospectus
containing the disclosure contemplated by condition 4 below, by the
initial shareholder(s) before offering shares of such Fund to the
public.
    3. Within 90 days of the hiring of any new investment subadvisor,
the Adviser will furnish shareholders of the affected Fund with all
information about such investment subadvisor that would be included in
a proxy statement, including any change in such disclosure caused by
the addition of the new investment subadvisor. To meet this condition,
the Funds will provide shareholders with an information statement
meeting the requirements of Regulation 14C, Schedule 14C, and Item 22
of Schedule 14A under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
    4. Each Fund will disclose in its prospectus the existence,
substance, and effect of any order granted pursuant to the application.
In addition, each Fund will hold itself out to the public as employing
the Management Structure described in the application. The prospectus
will prominently disclose that the Adviser has ultimate responsibility
(subject to oversight by the Board) to oversee investment subadvisors
and recommend their hiring, termination and replacement.
    5. No trustee or officer of any Fund, or director or officer of the
Adviser will own directly or indirectly (other than through a pooled
investment vehicle that is not controlled by any such director,
trustee, or officer) any interest in an investment subadvisor except
for: (i) Ownership of interests in the Adviser or any entity that
controls, is controlled by, or under common control with the Adviser;
or (ii) ownership of less than 1% of the outstanding securities of any
class of equity or debt securities of any publicly-traded company that
is either an investment subadvisor or an entity that controls, is
controlled by or is under common control with an investment subadvisor.
    6. The Adviser will not enter into investment subadvisory
agreements on behalf of a Fund with any affiliated investment
subadvisor without such agreement, including the compensation to be
paid under the agreement, being approved by the shareholders of the
applicable Fund.
    7. At all times, at least a majority of the Board will be
Independent Trustees, and the nomination of new or additional
Independent Trustees will be placed within the discretion of the then-
existing Independent Trustees.
    8. When a change of investment subadvisor is proposed for a Fund
with an affiliated investment subadvisor, the Board, including a
majority of the Independent Trustees, will make a separate finding,
reflected in the minutes of meetings of the Board, that any such change
of investment subadvisors is in the best interest of the Fund and its
shareholders and does not involve a conflict of interest from which the
Adviser or the affiliated investment subadvisor derives an
inappropriate advantage.
    9. In the event the Commission adopts a rule under the Act
providing substantially similar relief to that in the requested order,
the requested order will expire on the effective date of that rule.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
under delegated authority.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-28560 Filed 11-27-09; 8:45 am]


[Federal Register: September 6, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 172)]
[Notices]
[Page 51274]
[DOCID:fr06se07-105]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy, Washington, DC
20549-0213.

Extension:
    Rule 206(4)-2, SEC File No. 270-217, OMB Control No. 3235-0241

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') has submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget (``OMB'') a request for extension and revision of the
previously approved collection of information discussed below.
    Rule 206(4)-2 (17 CFR 275.206(4)-2) under the Investment Advisers
Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80b-1 et seq.) governs the custody of funds or
securities of clients by Commission-registered investment advisers.
Rule 206(4)-2 requires each investment adviser that has custody of
client funds or securities to maintain those client funds or securities
with a broker-dealer, bank or other ``qualified custodian.'' The rule
also requires the adviser to promptly notify the clients as to the
place and manner of custody, to send quarterly account statements to
each client whose assets are in the adviser's custody, and to have an
independent public accountant conduct an annual surprise examination of
the custodied assets. If the qualified custodian sends monthly account
statements directly to an adviser's clients, however, the adviser is
relieved from sending its own account statements and undergoing an
annual surprise examination. The rule exempts advisers from the rule
with respect to clients that are registered investment companies. The
rule also exempts advisers to limited partnerships and limited
liability companies from the account statement delivery and annual
surprise examination requirements if the limited partnerships or
limited liability companies they advise are subject to annual audit by
an independent public accountant.
    Advisory clients use this information to confirm proper handling of
their accounts. The Commission's staff uses the information obtained
through these collections in its enforcement, regulatory and
examination programs. Without the information collected under the rule,
the Commission would be less efficient and effective in its programs
and clients would not have information valuable for monitoring an
adviser's handling of their accounts.
    The respondents to this information collection are investment
advisers registered with the Commission and have custody of clients'
funds or securities. The staff estimates that 3352 advisers would be
subject to the information collection burden under the rule 206(4)-2.
The number of responses under rule 206(4)-2 will vary considerably
depending on the number of clients for which an adviser has custody of
funds or securities. It is estimated that the average number of
responses annually for each respondent would be 247,794, and the
average time of .5 hour per response would remain the same. The annual
aggregate burden for all respondents to the requirements of rule
206(4)-2 is estimated to be 415,303 hours.
    This collection of information is found at 17 CFR 275.206(4)-2 and
is mandatory. Commission-registered investment advisers are required to
maintain and preserve certain information required under rule 206(4)-2
for five years. The long-term retention of these records is necessary
for the Commission's examination program to ascertain compliance with
the Investment Advisers Act.
    The estimated average burden hours are made solely for the purposes
of Paperwork Reduction Act and are not derived from a comprehensive or
even representative survey or study of the cost of Commission rules and
forms. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays
a currently valid control number.
    Please direct general comments regarding the above information to
the following persons: (i) Desk Officer for the Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10102, New Executive
Office Building, Washington, DC 20503 or e-mail to:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and (ii) R. Corey Booth, Director/Chief Information

Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, C/O Shirley Martinson,
6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, VA 22312; or send an e-mail to:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Comments must be submitted to OMB within 30 days

of this notice.

    August 30, 2007.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-17585 Filed 9-5-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 124 (Tuesday, June 30, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 31175-31176]
[FR Doc No: E9-15339]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0283; Airspace Docket No. 09-ASW-8]

Establishment of Class D Airspace; Fort Worth, TX

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action establishes Class D airspace at Fort Worth Spinks
Airport, Fort Worth, TX. Establishment of an air traffic control tower
at Fort Worth Spinks Airport has made this action necessary for the
safety and management of Instrument Flight Rule (IFR) operations at
Fort Worth Spinks Airport.

DATES: 0901 UTC, October 22, 2009. The Director of the Federal Register
approves this incorporation by reference action under 1 CFR Part 51,
subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of
conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Enander, Central Service Center,
Operations Support Group, Federal Aviation Administration, Southwest
Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76137; telephone (817) 321-
7716.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On April 30, 2009, the FAA published in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking to establish Class D airspace at Fort
Worth Spinks Airport, Fort Worth, TX. (74 FR 19910, Docket No. FAA-
2009-0283). Interested parties were invited to participate in this
rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the
FAA. No comments were received. Class D airspace designations are
published in paragraph 5000 of FAA Order 7400.9S signed October 3,
2008, and effective October 31, 2008, which is incorporated by
reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class D airspace designations listed in
this document will be published subsequently in the Order.

The Rule

    This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 by establishing Class D airspace at Fort Worth Spinks Airport,
Fort Worth, TX, for the safety and management of IFR operations. This
Class D airspace area is effective during the specific dates and times
established in advance by a Notice to Airmen.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
Therefore, this regulation: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory
action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule''
under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106, describes
the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation
Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority.
This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it establishes controlled airspace at Fort Worth Spinks Airport,
Fort Worth, TX.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

0
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration
amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

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

0
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as
follows:

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of the Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9S, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, signed October 3, 2008, and effective

October 31, 2008, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace.

* * * * *

ASW TX D Fort Worth Spinks Airport, TX [New]

Fort Worth Spinks Airport, TX
    (Lat. 32[deg]33'55'' N., long. 97[deg]18'29'' W.)
    That airspace extending upward from the surface up to but not
including 3,000 feet MSL within a 4.1-mile radius of Fort Worth
Spinks Airport, and within 1 mile each side of the 173[deg] bearing
from the airport extending from the 4.1-mile radius to 4.8 miles
south of the airport. This Class D airspace area is effective during
the specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to
Airmen. The effective dates and times will thereafter be
continuously published in the Airport/Facility Directory.
* * * * *

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on June 19, 2009.
Anthony D. Roetzel,
Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. E9-15339 Filed 6-29-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P