[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 157 (Monday, August 15, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50518-50519]
[FR Doc No: 2011-20691]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-65057; File No. SR-CBOE-2011-070]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a
Proposed Rule Change To Amend the CBOE Stock Exchange Fees Schedule To
Waive the Trading Permit Holder Application Fee on the CBOE Stock
Exchange for the Month of August 2011

August 8, 2011.
    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 July 29, 2011, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(``Exchange'' or ``CBOE'') 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 the
Exchange. 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 waive the Trading Permit Holder
application fee on the CBOE Stock Exchange (``CBSX'') for the month of
August 2011. The text of the proposed rule change is available on the
Exchange's Web site (http://www.cboe.org/legal), at the Exchange's
Office of the Secretary, and at the Commission.

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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    CBSX normally applies the CBOE Trading Permit Holder Application
Fees to any applicant that applies to be a CBSX Trading Permit Holder.
CBSX hereby proposes, for the month of August 2011 only, to waive such
fees and not charge any fees for applications to become a CBSX Trading
Permit Holder. The purpose of this ``pricing special'' is to
incentivize broker-dealers and other market participants who are not
currently CBSX Trading Permit Holders to apply to become CBSX Trading
Permit Holders and begin to effect transactions on CBSX. To that end,
CBSX is willing to subsidize the application costs for the month of
August 2011. The proposed waiver should incentivize broker-dealers and
other market participants to apply to become CBSX Trading Permit
Holders, and the increased number of Trading Permit Holders on CBSX
will bring greater liquidity to CBSX, which would benefit all current
CBSX Trading Permit Holders.
    The proposed rule change will take effect on August 1, 2011 and
cease effectiveness on August 31, 2011.
2. Statutory Basis
    The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the
Act,\3\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) \4\
of the Act in particular, in that it is designed to provide for the
equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among
CBOE Trading Permit Holders and other persons using Exchange
facilities. A one-month, temporary waiver of a regular application fee
is certainly reasonable because it makes applying to become a CBSX
Trading Permit Holder free. The temporary waiver is equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory because it waives the application fees for any
party applying during August 2011 to become a CBSX Trading Permit
Holder. The proposed waiver should incentivize

broker-dealers and other market participants to apply to become CBSX
Trading Permit Holders, and the increased number of Trading Permit
Holders on CBSX will bring greater liquidity to CBSX, which would
benefit all current CBSX Trading Permit Holders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    CBOE does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any
burden on competition 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

    The proposed rule change is designated by the Exchange as
establishing or changing a due, fee, or other charge, thereby
qualifying for effectiveness on filing pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)
of the Act \5\ and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4 \6\ thereunder. At
any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the
Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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-CBOE-2011-070 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2011-070. 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 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-CBOE-2011-070 and should be
submitted on or before September 6, 2011.

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

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

Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-20691 Filed 8-12-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 96 (Thursday, May 20, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27436-27437]
[FR Doc No: 2021-10593]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2021-P-0226]

Determination That AVACLYR (Acyclovir Ophthalmic Ointment), 3
Percent, Was Not Withdrawn From Sale for Reasons of Safety or
Effectiveness

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) has
determined that AVACLYR (acyclovir ophthalmic ointment), 3 percent, was
not withdrawn from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness. This
determination will allow FDA to approve abbreviated new drug
applications (ANDAs) for acyclovir ophthalmic ointment, 3 percent, if
all other legal and regulatory requirements are met.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nisha Shah, Center for Drug Evaluation
and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave.,
Bldg. 51, Rm. 6222, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 1984, Congress enacted the Drug Price
Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 (Pub. L. 98-417)
(the 1984 amendments), which authorized the approval of duplicate
versions of drug products under an ANDA procedure. ANDA applicants
must, with certain exceptions, show that the drug for which they are
seeking approval contains the same active ingredient in the same
strength and dosage form as the ``listed drug,'' which is a version of
the drug that was previously approved. ANDA applicants do not have to
repeat the extensive clinical testing otherwise necessary to gain
approval of a new drug application (NDA).
    The 1984 amendments include what is now section 505(j)(7) of the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 355(j)(7)), which
requires FDA to publish a list of all approved drugs. FDA publishes
this list as part of the ``Approved Drug Products With Therapeutic
Equivalence Evaluations,'' which is known generally as the ``Orange
Book.'' Under FDA regulations, drugs are removed from the list if the
Agency withdraws or suspends approval of the drug's NDA or ANDA for
reasons of safety or effectiveness or if FDA determines that the listed
drug was withdrawn from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness (21
CFR 314.162).
    A person may petition the Agency to determine, or the Agency may
determine on its own initiative, whether a listed drug was withdrawn
from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness. This determination
may be made at any time after the drug has been withdrawn from sale,
but must be made prior to approving an ANDA that refers to the listed
drug (Sec.  314.161 (21 CFR 314.161)). FDA may not approve an ANDA that
does not refer to a listed drug.
    AVACLYR (acyclovir ophthalmic ointment), 3 percent, is the subject
of NDA 202408, held by Fera Pharmaceuticals, LLC, and initially
approved on March 29, 2019. AVACLYR is indicated for the treatment of
acute herpetic keratitis (dendritic ulcers) in patients with herpes
simplex (HSV-1 and HSV-2) virus.
    In a letter dated August 21, 2019, Fera Pharmaceuticals, LLC
notified FDA that AVACLYR (acyclovir ophthalmic ointment), 3 percent,
was being discontinued, and FDA moved the drug product to the
``Discontinued Drug Product List'' section of the Orange Book.
    Cumulus Pharmaceutical LLC submitted a citizen petition dated
February 23, 2021, (Docket No. FDA-2021-P-0226), under 21 CFR 10.30,
requesting that the Agency determine whether AVACLYR (acyclovir
ophthalmic ointment), 3 percent, was withdrawn from sale for reasons of
safety or effectiveness.
    After considering the citizen petition and reviewing Agency records
and based on the information we have at this time, FDA has determined
under Sec.  314.161 that AVACLYR (acyclovir ophthalmic ointment), 3
percent, was not withdrawn for reasons of safety or effectiveness. The
petitioner has identified no data or other information suggesting that
AVACLYR (acyclovir ophthalmic ointment), 3 percent, was withdrawn for
reasons of safety or effectiveness. We have carefully reviewed our
files for records concerning the withdrawal of AVACLYR (acyclovir
ophthalmic ointment), 3 percent, from sale. We have also independently
evaluated relevant literature and data for possible postmarketing
adverse events. We have reviewed the available evidence and determined
that this drug product was not withdrawn from sale for reasons of
safety or effectiveness.
    Accordingly, the Agency will continue to list AVACLYR (acyclovir
ophthalmic ointment), 3 percent, in the ``Discontinued Drug Product
List'' section of the Orange Book. The ``Discontinued Drug Product
List'' delineates, among other items, drug products that have been
discontinued from marketing for reasons other than safety or
effectiveness. Any ANDAs referencing AVACLYR (acyclovir ophthalmic
ointment), 3 percent, may be approved by the Agency as long as they
meet all other legal and regulatory requirements for the approval of
ANDAs. If FDA determines that labeling for this drug product should be
revised to meet current standards, the Agency will advise ANDA
applicants to submit such labeling.

    Dated: May 14, 2021.
Lauren K. Roth,
Acting Principal Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2021-10593 Filed 5-19-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 34 (Tuesday, February 23, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 11044]
[FR Doc No: 2021-03631]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No. 2021-2049]

Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received; Accelerated
Aviation Instruction, LLC

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice contains a summary of a petition seeking relief
from specified requirements of Federal Aviation Regulations. The
purpose of this notice is to improve the public's awareness of, and
participation in, the FAA's exemption process. Neither publication of
this notice nor the inclusion or omission of information in the summary
is intended to affect the legal status of the petition or its final
disposition.

DATES: Comments on this petition must identify the petition docket
number and must be received on or before March 15, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2020-1153
using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30; U.S.
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W12-140,
West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments
from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts
these comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to http://www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
http://www.dot.gov/privacy.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140
of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Megan Blatchford,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Office of Rulemaking, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591.
    This notice is published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85.

    Issued in Washington, DC.
Timothy R. Adams,
Deputy Executive Director, Office of Rulemaking.

Petition for Exemption

    Docket No.: FAA-2020-1153.
    Petitioner: Accelerated Aviation Instruction, LLC.
    Section of 14 CFR Affected: Sec.  61.129(b)(3)(ii).
    Description of Relief Sought: Accelerated Aviation Instruction, LLC
(AAI) seeks relief from Sec.  61.129(b)(3)(ii) of Title 14, Code of
Federal Regulations to allow AAI to use a multiengine airplane with a
fixed landing gear (Partenavia P68C) in place of a complex multi-engine
or turbine powered airplane to satisfy the experience requirements for
commercial pilot certificate with an airplane multiengine rating.

[FR Doc. 2021-03631 Filed 2-22-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


6.0 CUMULATIVE EXPOSURE TO SUBSTANCES WITH A COMMON MECHANISM OF TOXICITY The Food Quality Protection Act (1996) stipulates that when determining the safety of a pesticide chemical, EPA shall base its assessment of the risk posed by the chemical on, among other things, available information concerning the cumulative effects to human health that may result from dietary, residential, or other non occupational exposure to other substances that have a common mechanism of toxicity. The reason for consideration of other substances is due to the possibility that low level exposures to multiple chemical substances that cause a common toxic effect by a common mechanism could lead to the same adverse health effect as would a higher level of exposure to any of the other substances individually. A person exposed to a pesticide at a level that is considered safe may in fact experience harm if that person is also exposed to other substances that cause a common toxic effect by a mechanism common with that of the subject pesticide, even if the individual exposure levels to the other substances are also considered safe.

HED did not perform a cumulative risk assessment as part of this risk assessment for pronamide because HED has not yet initiated a review to determine if there are any other chemical substances that have a mechanism of toxicity common with that of pronamide. For purposes of this tolerance reassessment review, EPA has assumed that pronamide does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances. 41 7.0 INCIDENT DATA A review of incident data sources found that relatively few incidents of pronamide poisonings were reported (J. Blondell, M. Spann, August 10, 2001). There are only two Poison Center reports, no incident reports in OPPs Incident Data System and only two reports from the California Pesticide Illness Surveillance Program. On the list of the top 200 chemicals for which National Pesticide Telecommunications Network (NPTN) received calls from 1984 1991 inclusively, pronamide was not reported to be involved in human incidents.

8.0 TOLERANCE REASSESSMENT RECOMMENDATIONS 8.1 Tolerance Reassessment Recommendation Pronamide tolerances are established under 40 CFR §180.317( a), (b), and (c). The tolerance expression, listed in (a) and (c), is in terms of the combined residues of the herbicide propyzamide and its metabolites (containing the 3,5 dichlorobenzoyl moiety and calculated as 3,5 dichloro N( 1,1 dimethyl2 propynyl) benzamide). The tolerance expression, listed in (b), is in terms of the parent only. HED recommends that the tolerance expression under (b) be modified to include the metabolites (containing the 3,5 dichlorobenzoyl moiety and calculated as 3,5 dichloro N( 1,1 dimethyl 2 propynyl) benzamide).

A summary of pronamide tolerance reassessments is presented in Table 8. For a full discussion of tolerances see the HED Residue Chemistry Chapter (J. Morales, February 28).

Tolerances for inadvertent residues of pronamide and its metabolites containing the 3,5 dichlorobenzoyl moiety should be proposed for: (1) the forage of cereal grains crop at 0.6 ppm; (2) the straw of cereal grains crop at 0.3 ppm; and (3) the hay of cereal grains crop at 0.2 ppm. The required tolerance proposal is concomitant with a recommendation for a label revision to establish a 180 day plantback interval for Crop Group 16. . Table 8. Tolerance Reassessment Summary for Pronamide Commodity Established Tolerance (ppm) Reassessed Tolerance (ppm) Comment Correct Commodity Definition Tolerances Listed Under 40 CFR §180.317( a)

Apples 0.1 0. 1 Apple Artichokes 0. 1 0.051 Artichoke Blackberries 0.05 0.05 Blackberry Blueberries 0.05 0.05 Blueberry Boysenberries 0.05 0.05 Boysenberry Cattle, fat 0. 02 0. 20 Cattle, kidney 0. 4 0.4 Cattle, liver 0.4 0. 4 Cattle, mbyp (except kidney, liver) 0.02 0.02 Cattle, meat 0.02 0.02 Eggs 0.02 0.02 Table 8. Tolerance Reassessment Summary for Pronamide Commodity Established Tolerance (ppm) Reassessed Tolerance (ppm) Comment Correct Commodity Definition 42 Endive (escarole) 1.0 1. 0 Goats, fat 0. 02 0. 20 Goats, kidney 0. 4 0.4 Goats, liver 0.4 0. 4 Goats, mbyp (except kidney, liver) 0.02 0.02 Goats, meat 0.02 0.02 Grapes 0.1 0. 1 Grape Hogs, fat 0. 02 0. 20 Hogs, kidney 0. 4 0.4 Hogs, liver 0.4 0. 4 Hogs, mbyp (except kidney, liver) 0.02 0.02 Hogs, meat 0.02 0.02 Horses, fat 0. 02 0. 20 Horses, kidney 0. 4 0.4 Horses, liver 0.4 0. 4 Horses, mbyp (except kidney, liver) 0.02 0.02 Horses, meat 0.02 0.02 Lettuce 1.0 1. 0 Lettuce, head Only head lettuce is supported by acceptable data; leaf lettuce uses must be removed from the label. Alternatively, the label may be revised to specify a practical PHI (35 day) for leaf lettuce and supporting data be submitted.

Milk 0.02 0.02 Nongrass animal feeds 10.0 10.0 Nongrass animal feeds (forage, fodder, straw, and hay) group Pears 0. 1 0.1 Pear Poultry, fat 0. 02 0. 02 Poultry, kidney 0. 2 Revoke Tolerances are typically not established for poultry kidneys.

Poultry, liver 0.2 0. 2 Poultry, mbyp (except kidney, liver) 0.02 0.02 Poultry, mbyp (except liver)

Poultry, meat 0.02 0.02 Radicchio, greens (tops) 2. 0 2.0 Raspberries 0.05 0.05 Raspberry Sheep, fat 0. 02 0. 20 Sheep, kidney 0. 4 0.4 Sheep, liver 0.4 0. 4 Table 8. Tolerance Reassessment Summary for Pronamide Commodity Established Tolerance (ppm) Reassessed Tolerance (ppm) Comment Correct Commodity Definition 43 Sheep, mbyp (except kidney, liver) 0.02 0.02 Sheep, meat 0.02 0.02 Stone fruits 0.1 0. 1 Stone fruits group Tolerances To Be Proposed Under 40 CFR §180.317( a)

Alfalfa, seed  10.0 Tolerance recommendation is contingent upon required label revision to specify a 50 day PHI and a maximum seasonal rate of 2.0 lb ai/ A.

Tolerances Listed Under 40 CFR §180.317( b)

Cranberries 0.05 [with 12/ 31/ 01 expiration date] 0.05 Cranberry Grass, forage 1.0 [with 12/ 31/ 01 expiration date] 1.0 Additional data are required for the establishment of permanent tolerances on grass forage and hay. Grass, hay 0.5 [with 12/ 31/ 01 expiration date] 0.5 Tolerances Listed Under 40 CFR §180.317( c)

Peas, dried (winter) 0.05 TBD Pea, field, seed Rhubarb 0.1 0. 1 Tolerances To Be Proposed Under 40 CFR §180.317( c)

Pea, field, hay  TBD Pea, field, vines – TBD CODEX HARMONIZATION No Codex MRLs have been established or proposed for residues of pronamide. Therefore, issues of compatibility with respect to U. S. tolerances and Codex MRLs do not exist.

9.0 DATA NEEDS Product Chemistry Most pertinent product chemistry data requirements are satisfied for the Rohm and Haas 94.6% T/ TGAI, except additional data are required concerning the materials used to produce the product and UV/ Visible absorption (OPPTS 830.1600 and 7050). Additional data are also required for the Rohm and Haas 51% FI concerning oxidation/ reduction, explodability, storage stability, and corrosion characteristics (OPPTS 830.6314, 6316, 6317, and 6320). Provided that the registrant submits the data required in the attached data summary tables for the pronamide T/ TGAI and FI, and either certifies that the suppliers of beginning materials and the manufacturing processes have not changed since the last comprehensive product chemistry reviews or submits complete updated product chemistry data packages, HED has no 44 objections to the reregistration of pronamide with respect to product chemistry data requirements.

Toxicology Although there is confidence in the overall scientific quality of the available toxicity data, several data gaps were identified: a developmental toxicity study in rats, a 21 day dermal toxicity study, 28 day inhalation toxicity study, a dermal penetration study and a comparative thyroid rat assay in adult animals and offspring.

Residue Chemistry A review of the product labels and the supporting residue data indicate the following label amendments and data submissions are required:

C additional residue data are required for: use on grasses, dried winter peas (outstanding), the vines and hay of winter peas, grass forage, and hay. C label amendments are required for alfalfa grown for seed, lettuce, and peas (winter); see chemistry chapter for details; C label revisions should be made for rotational crops as listed: 1. 30 day plantback interval for leafy vegetables (except Brassica vegetables) (Crop Group 4); 2. 90 day plantback interval for root and tuber vegetables (Crop Group 1); 3. 360 day plantback interval for cereal grains (Crop Group 15) and the forage, fodder, and straw of cereal grains (Crop Group 16).

For purposes of reregistration, no additional plant metabolism studies are required; however, because the available metabolism studies were only conducted on alfalfa and lettuce, the Agency may require additional metabolism studies in the future should the registrants seek for additional uses on other crop groups.

The registrant is required to further optimize/ improve the revised animal enforcement method (TR 34 91 68) to yield acceptable recoveries at a fortification level equal to established animal tolerances. Following method improvement, the registrant is required to submit bridging independent laboratory validation data; the required ILV data should include two control samples fortified at 0.4 ppm, the reassessed tolerance level for the kidney and liver of ruminants.

Additional confirmatory storage stability data for the regulated pronamide metabolites on alfalfa, apples, grapes, lettuce, and peaches or plums are required.


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 65 (Tuesday, April 5, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18751-18753]
[FR Doc No: 2011-8030]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP11-128-000; Docket No. CP11-133-000]

National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation; Tennessee Gas Pipeline
Company; Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Assessment for
the Proposed Northern Access Project and Station 230c Project, Request
for Comments on Environmental Issues, and Notice of Public
Environmental Site Review

    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or
Commission) will prepare an environmental assessment (EA) that will
discuss the environmental impacts of two related projects proposed by
National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation (National Fuel) and Tennessee Gas
Pipeline Company (TGP). National Fuel's Northern Access Project would
involve construction and operation of facilities in Erie County, New
York and Potter County, Pennsylvania. TGP's Station 230C Project would
involve construction and operation of facilities in Niagara County, New
York. This EA will be used by the Commission in its decision-making
process to determine whether these projects are in the public
convenience and necessity.
    This notice announces the opening of the scoping process the
Commission will use to gather input from the public and interested
agencies on the projects. Your input will help the Commission staff
determine what issues need to be evaluated in the EA. Please note that
the scoping period will close on April 28, 2011.
    Commission staff will conduct two onsite environmental reviews of
National Fuel's proposed East Aurora Compressor Station site and its
Ellisburg Compressor Station expansion. All interested parties planning
to attend must provide their own transportation. Those attending should
meet at the following locations:

East Aurora Compressor Station Site Review April 11, 2011, at 2 pm,
Meet at Tops Plaza, 65 Grey Street, East Aurora, New York 14052.
Ellisburg Compressor Station Site Review April 14, 2011, at 8 am, Meet
at the Westgate Inn Hotel (Lobby), 307 Route 6 West, Coudersport,
Pennsylvania 16915.
    This notice is being sent to the Commission's environmental mailing
list for these projects. State and local government representatives are
asked to notify their constituents of these proposed projects and
encourage them to comment on their areas of concern.
    A fact sheet prepared by the FERC entitled ``An Interstate Natural
Gas Facility On My Land? What Do I Need To Know?'' was attached to the
project notice National Fuel and TGP provided to landowners. This fact
sheet addresses a number of typically-asked questions, including the
use of eminent domain and how to participate in the Commission's
proceedings. It is also available for viewing on the FERC website
(http://www.ferc.gov).

Summary of the Proposed Projects

    National Fuel's proposed Northern Access Project would provide
about 320,000 dekatherms per day of firm Marcellus Shale natural gas
transportation service to northeastern and Canadian markets. The
Northern Access Project would consist of the following:
     A new East Aurora Compressor Station, totaling 4,470-
horsepower (hp), and auxiliary facilities in Erie County, New York;
     Piping modifications at the existing Concord Compressor
Station in Erie County, New York to permit bidirectional flow;
     Two additional compressor units, totaling 9,470-hp, at the
existing Ellisburg Compressor Station in Potter County, Pennsylvania;
and
     Upgrades to the existing Rose Lake Interconnection
metering facilities at the Ellisburg Compressor Station.
    TGP's proposed project would include upgrades and modifications at
its existing Compressor Station 230C in Niagara County, New York,
located on the Niagara Spur Loop Line (NSLL). TGP states that the
purpose of the Station 230C Project is to make the NSLL facilities,
jointly owned with National Fuel, a bi-directional pipeline. TGP's and
National Fuel's projects would make the proposed receipt and delivery
service available to the northeastern and Canadian markets. TGP's
project would consist of the following facilities at the Compressor
Station 230C:
     Abandonment by replacement of the A2 and A3 compressor
engines;
     Restaging of centrifugal compressors for units A2, A3, and
A4 to match bi-directional flow conditions;
     Piping modifications to allow reverse flow;
     New discharge flow check meters and check valves along the
existing 20- and 30-inch pipelines;
     New station discharge cooling equipment; and
     Modification to station automation systems and
installation of yard valves to allow bi-directional flow.
    The general locations of the projects' facilities are shown in
appendix 1.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Land Requirements for Construction

    Construction of the Northern Access Project facilities would
disturb a total of about 12.6 acres of land for the aboveground
facilities. Following construction, a total of about 11.4 acres would
be maintained for permanent operation of the project's facilities.
    Construction of the Station 230C Project facilities would disturb
about 7 acres of land for the compressor station upgrades and
modifications; this includes 4.6 acres of temporary workspace outside
the existing station fence line. About 2.4 acres of land within the
station fence line would be required for operation of the project
facilities.

The EA Process

    The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires the
Commission to take into account the environmental impacts that could
result from an action whenever it considers the issuance of a
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. NEPA also requires us
\2\ to discover and address concerns the public may have about
proposals. This process is referred to as ``scoping''. The main goal of
the scoping process is to focus the analysis in the EA on the important
environmental issues. By this notice, the Commission requests public
comments on the scope of the issues to address in the EA. All comments
received will be considered during the preparation of the EA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ ``We,'' ``us,'' and ``our'' refer to the environmental staff
of the Commission's Office of Energy Projects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the EA we will discuss impacts that could occur as a result of
the construction and operation of the proposed projects under these
general headings:
     Geology and Soils;
     Land Use;
     Water Resources, Fisheries, and Wetlands;
     Endangered and Threatened Species;

     Vegetation and Wildlife;
     Cultural Resources;
     Air Quality and Noise; and
     Public safety.
    We will also evaluate reasonable alternatives to the proposed
projects or portions of the projects, and make recommendations on how
to lessen or avoid impacts on the various resource areas.
    Our independent analysis of the issues will be presented in the EA.
The EA will be placed in the public record and, depending on the
comments received during the scoping process, may be published and
distributed to the public. A comment period will be allotted if the EA
is published for review. We will consider all comments on the EA before
we make our recommendations to the Commission. To ensure your comments
are considered, please carefully follow the instructions in the Public
Participation section beginning on page 5.
    With this notice, we are asking agencies with jurisdiction and/or
special expertise with respect to environmental issues to formally
cooperate with us in the preparation of the EA. These agencies may
choose to participate once they have evaluated the proposal relative to
their responsibilities. Agencies that would like to request cooperating
agency status should follow the instructions for filing comments
provided under the Public Participation section of this notice.

Consultations Under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act

    In accordance with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
implementing regulations for section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act, we are using this notice to initiate consultation
with applicable State Historic Preservation Offices (SHPO), and to
solicit their views and those of other government agencies, interested
Indian tribes, and the public on the projects' potential effects on
historic properties.\3\ We will define the project-specific Area of
Potential Effects (APE) in consultation with the SHPOs as the projects
are further developed. On natural gas facility projects, the APE at a
minimum encompasses all areas subject to ground disturbance (examples
include construction right-of-way, contractor/pipe storage yards,
compressor stations, and access roads). Our EA for these projects will
document our findings on the impacts on historic properties and
summarize the status of consultations under section 106.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's regulations
are at Title 36, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 800. Historic
properties are defined in those regulations as any prehistoric or
historic district, site, building, structure, or object included in
or eligible for inclusion in the National Register for Historic
Places.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Public Participation

    You can make a difference by providing us with your specific
comments or concerns about the projects. Your comments should focus on
the potential environmental effects, reasonable alternatives, and
measures to avoid or lessen environmental impacts. The more specific
your comments, the more useful they will be. To ensure that your
comments are timely and properly recorded, please send your comments so
that they will be received in Washington, DC on or before April 28,
2011.
    For your convenience, there are three methods which you can use to
submit your comments to the Commission. In all instances please
reference the project docket numbers (CP11-128-000 and CP11-133-000)
with your submission. The Commission encourages electronic filing of
comments and has expert eFiling staff available to assist you at (202)
502-8258 or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (1) You may file your comments electronically by using the eComment
feature, which is located on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov under the link to Documents and Filings. An eComment is an
easy method for interested persons to submit brief, text-only comments
on a project;
    (2) You may file your comments electronically by using the eFiling
feature, which is located on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov under the link to Documents and Filings. With eFiling, you
can provide comments in a variety of formats by attaching them as a
file with your submission. New eFiling users must first create an
account by clicking on ``eRegister.'' You will be asked to select the
type of filing you are making. A comment on a particular project is
considered a ``Comment on a Filing''; or
    (3) You may file a paper copy of your comments at the following
address:

Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street, NE., Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426.

Environmental Mailing List

    The environmental mailing list includes federal, state, and local
government representatives and agencies; elected officials;
environmental and public interest groups; Native American Tribes; other
interested parties; and local libraries and newspapers. This list also
includes all affected landowners (as defined in the Commission's
regulations) who are potential right-of-way grantors, whose property
may be used temporarily for project purposes, or who own homes within
certain distances of aboveground facilities, and anyone who submits
comments on the projects. We will update the environmental mailing list
as the analysis proceeds to ensure that we send the information related
to this environmental review to all individuals, organizations, and
government entities interested in and/or potentially affected by the
proposed projects.
    If the EA is published for distribution, copies will be sent to the
environmental mailing list for public review and comment. If you would
prefer to receive a paper copy of the document instead of the CD
version or would like to remove your name from the mailing list, please
return the attached Information Request (appendix 2).

Becoming an Intervenor

    In addition to involvement in the EA scoping process, you may want
to become an ``intervenor'' which is an official party to the
Commission's proceeding. Intervenors play a more formal role in the
process and are able to file briefs, appear at hearings, and be heard
by the courts if they choose to appeal the Commission's final ruling.
An intervenor formally participates in the proceeding by filing a
request to intervene. Instructions for becoming an intervenor are
included in the User's Guide under the ``e-filing'' link on the
Commission's Web site.

Additional Information

    Additional information about the projects is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC, or on the
FERC Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Click
on the eLibrary link, click on ``General Search'' and enter the docket
number, excluding the last three digits in the Docket Number field
(i.e., CP11-128 or CP11-133). Be sure you have selected an appropriate
date range. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>. The eLibrary link also provides access to the
texts of formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders,
notices, and rulemakings.
    In addition, the Commission now offers a free service called
eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances
and submittals in

specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time you spend
researching proceedings by automatically providing you with
notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to
the documents. Go to http://www.ferc.gov/esubscribenow.htm.
    Finally, public meetings or site visits will be posted on the
Commission's calendar located at http://www.ferc.gov/EventCalendar/EventsList.aspx along with other related information.

    Dated: March 29, 2011.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-8030 Filed 4-4-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 130 (Monday, July 10, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43431-43432]
[FR Doc No: 2023-14357]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2023-1078; Airspace Docket No. 23-AWP-30]
RIN 2120-AA66

Establishment of Class E Airspace; Whiteriver, AZ

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action establishes Class E airspace at Whiteriver, AZ.
This action supports new instrument procedures at this airport.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, October 5, 2023. 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 JO 7400.11 and
publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: A copy of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), all
comments received, this final rule, and all background material may be
viewed online at www.regulations.gov using the FAA Docket number.
Electronic retrieval help and guidelines are available on the website.
It is available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11G, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points,
and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. You may also contact the Rules and
Regulations Group, Office of Policy, Federal Aviation Administration,
800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Claypool, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Central Service Center, 10101
Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it establishes Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above
the surface and Class E airspace extending upward from 1,200 feet above
the surface at Whiteriver Airport, Whiteriver, AZ, to support
instrument flight rule operations at this airport.

History

    The FAA published an NPRM for Docket No. FAA-2023-1078 in the
Federal Register (88 FR 29571; May 8, 2023) proposing to establish
Class E airspace at Whiteriver, AZ. Interested parties were invited to
participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on
the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received.

Incorporation by Reference

    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order JO 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, which
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 on an annual basis. This
document amends the current version of that order, FAA Order JO
7400.11G, dated August 19, 2022, and effective September 15, 2022. FAA
Order JO 7400.11G is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES
section of this document. These amendments will be published in the
next update to FAA Order JO 7400.11.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11G lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas,
air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR part 71:
    Establishes Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above
the surface within a 37.8-mile radius of Whiteriver Airport,
Whiteriver, AZ;
    And establishes Class E airspace extending upward from 1,200 feet
above the surface to within a 78.3-mile radius of Whiteriver Airport.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

Environmental Review

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

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Amendment

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

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1   [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order JO
7400.11G, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 19,
2022, and effective September 15, 2022, is amended as follows:

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

* * * * *

AWP AZ E5 Whiteriver, AZ [Establish]

Whiteriver Airport, AZ
    (Lat 33[deg]48'38'' N, long 109[deg]59'09'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 37.8-mile radius of Whiteriver Airport; and that airspace
extending upward from 1,200 feet above the surface within a 78.3-
mile radius of Whiteriver Airport.
* * * * *

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on July 3, 2023.
Martin A. Skinner,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2023-14357 Filed 7-7-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT SUBMISSION Please read the instructions before completing this form. For additional forms or assistance in completing this form, contact your agency's Paperwork Clearance Officer. Send two copies of this form, the collection instrument to be reviewed, the Supporting Statement and any additional documentation to: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th Street NW Washington, DC 20503.

1. Agency/ Subagency originating request U. S. EPA 2. OMB control number b. G None a 2060 0181 3. Type of information collection ( check one) a. G New collection b. G Revision of a currently approved collection c. X Extension of a currently approved collection d. G Reinstatement, without change, of a previously approved collection for which approval has expired e. G Reinstatement, with change, of a previously approved collection for which approval has expired f. G Existing collection in use without an OMB control number 4. Type of review requested ( check one) a. X Regular b. G Emergency  Approval requested by: / / c. G Delegated 5. Small entities Will this information collection have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? G Yes X No For b f, note item A2 of Supporting Statement Instructions 6. Requested expiration date a. X Three years from approval date b. G Other Specify: / /___

7. Title: Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources; Polymeric Coating of Supporting Substrates Facilities, Subpart VVV 8. Agency form number( s) ( If applicable) EPA ICR Control Number 1284.06 9. Keywords: Clean Air Act, Environmental Protection, Air Pollution Control 10. Abstract: NSPS Subpart VVV applies to each coating operation and any onsite mix preparation equipment used to prepare coating for the polymeric coating of supporting substrates, that commences construction, modification or reconstruction after April 30, 1987. The rule establishes standards for VOC use, emission reduction limits, and for capture and recovery of VOC emissions. The recordkeeping, monitoring and reporting requirements allow the regulatory agencies to determine compliance with the standard. One time reports are required to identify the affected facilities and the compliance method used. Semiannual reports of compliance and quarterly reports of monitoring exceedances and periods of noncompliance are used to verify compliance. Annual reports of when an affected facility first exceeds a projected VOC use limit or the 12 month actual VOC limit are used to determine the applicable requirements.

11. Affected public ( Mark primary with " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. Individuals or households d. Farms b. X Business or other for profit e. Federal Government c. Not for profit institutions f. State, Local or Tribal Government 12. Obligation to respond ( Mark primary with " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. G Voluntary b. G Required to obtain or retain benefits c. P Mandatory 13. Annual reporting and recordkeeping hour burden a. Number of respondents 56 b. Total annual responses 173 1. Percentage of these responses collected electronically 0 % c. Total annual hours requested 14,366 d. Current OMB inventory 14,376 e. Difference  10 f. Explanation of difference 1. Program Change 0 2. Adjustment  10 14. Annual reporting and recordkeeping cost burden ( in thousands of dollars) a. Total annualized capital/ startup costs 43 b. Total annual costs ( O& M) 521 c. Total annualized cost requested 564 d. Current OMB inventory 270 e. Difference 294 f. Explanation of difference 1. Program change 0 2. Adjustment 294 15. Purpose of information collection ( Mark Primary With " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. __ Application for benefits e. __ Program planning or management b. __ Program evaluation f. __ Research c. __ General purpose statistics g. _ P_ Regulatory or compliance d. __ Audit 16. Frequency of recordkeeping or reporting ( check all that apply) a. X Recordkeeping b. Q Third party disclosure c. X Reporting 1. Q On occasion 2. Q Weekly 3. Q Monthly 4. X Quarterly 5. X Semi annually 6. Q Annually 7. Q Biannually 8. X Other ( describe) initial annual report, if applicable 17. Statistical methods Does this information collection employ statistical methods?

Q Yes X No 18. Agency contact ( person who can best answer questions regarding the content of this submission) Name: Steven E. Hoover Phone: 202 564 7007 OMB 83 I 10/ 95 19. Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions On behalf of this Federal agency, 1 certify that the collection of information encompassed by this request complies with' 5 CFR 1320.9.

NOTE: The text of 5 CFR 1320.9, and the related provisions of 5 CFR 1320.8( b)( 3), appear at the end of the instructions. The certification is to be made with reference to those regulatory provisions as set forth in the instructions.

The following is a summary of the topics, regarding the proposed collection of information, that the certification covers:

( a) It is necessary for the proper performance of agency functions;

( b) It avoids unnecessary duplication;

© It reduces burden on small entities;

( d) It uses plain, coherent, and unambiguous terminology that is understandable to respondents;

( e) Its implementation will be consistent and compatible with current reporting and recordkeeping practices;

( f) It indicates the retention periods for recordkeeping requirements;

( g) It informs respondents of the information called for under 5 CFR 1320.8( b)( 3): ( I) Why the information is being collected; ( ii) Use of information; ( iii) Burden estimate; ( iv) Nature of response ( voluntary, required for a benefit, or mandatory); ( v) Nature and extent of confidentiality; and ( vi) Need to display currently valid OMB control number;

( h) It was developed by an office that has planned and allocated resources for the efficient and effective management and use of the information to be collected ( see note in Item 19 of the instructions);

( I) It uses effective and efficient statistical survey methodology; and ( j) It makes appropriate use of information technology.

If you are unable to certify compliance with any of these provisions, identify the item below and explain the reason in Item 18 of the Supporting Statement.

Signature of Program Office Official Michael S. Alushin, Director Compliance Assessment and Media Program Division Date Signature of Senior Official or designee Oscar Morales, Director Collection Strategies Division Office of Environmental Information ( OEI) Date OMB 83 I 10/ 95


[Federal Register: June 14, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 114)]
[Notices]
[Page 32926-32927]
[DOCID:fr14jn07-96]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-55884]

Order Exempting Certain Error Correction Transactions From Rule
611 of Regulation NMS Under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

June 8, 2007.

I. Introduction

    Pursuant to Rule 611(d) \1\ of Regulation NMS \2\ under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange Act''), the Securities and
Exchange Commission (``Commission''), by order, may exempt from the
provisions of Rule 611 of Regulation NMS (``Rule 611'' or ``Rule''),
either unconditionally or on specified terms and conditions, any
person, security, transaction, quotation, or order, or any class or
classes of persons, securities, quotations, or orders, if the
Commission determines that such exemption is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, and is consistent with the protection of
investors.\3\ As discussed below, the Commission is exempting from Rule
611(a) certain transactions to correct bona fide errors in the
execution of customer orders, subject to specified conditions discussed
below. The exemption is designed to promote efficiency and the best
execution of investor orders by allowing trading centers to correct
bona fide errors in a manner consistent with their customers' orders,
without the trading centers incurring additional costs to meet the
requirements of Rule 611(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 17 CFR 242.611(d).
    \2\ 17 CFR 242.600 et seq.
    \3\ See also 15 U.S.C. 78mm(a)(1) (providing general authority
for the Commission to grant exemptions from provisions of the
Exchange Act and rules thereunder).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Background

    The Commission adopted Regulation NMS in June 2005.\4\ Rule 611
addresses intermarket trade-throughs of displayed quotations in NMS
stocks. Rule 611(a)(1) requires a trading center to establish,
maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures that are
reasonably designed to prevent trade-throughs on that trading center of
protected quotations in NMS stocks that do not fall within an exception
set forth in the Rule. Rule 611(b)(6) provides an exception for a
trade-through transaction effected by a trading center that
simultaneously routes an intermarket sweep order (``ISO'') to execute
against the full displayed size of any protected quotation in the NMS
stock that was traded through. Rule 611(b)(5) provides an exception for
a trade-through transaction that is an execution of an ISO. Finally,
Rule 611(c) requires that the trading center, broker, or dealer
responsible for the routing of an ISO take reasonable steps to
establish that such order meets the definition of an ISO in Rule
600(b)(30).\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496 (June 29, 2005) (``Regulation NMS Adopting
Release'').
    \5\ 17 CFR 242.600(b)(30).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Trading Committee of the Securities Industry and Financial
Markets Association (``SIFMA'') has requested that the Commission
exempt certain error correction transactions from Rule 611(a).\6\
According to the SIFMA Exemption Request, error correction transactions
are the mechanism through which broker-dealers remedy the execution of
customer orders that have been placed in error or mishandled due to an
error involving any term of an order, including, for example, price,
number of shares, identification of the security, or execution of a
transaction on the wrong side of the market.\7\ In addition, the SIFMA
Exemption Request noted that, given the high level of automation in
today's marketplace, errors often result from delays, outages, or other
failures of communications systems used in the delivery or execution of
an order. Broker-dealers typically remedy such bona fide errors by
entering a subsequent trade on behalf of the customer on the correct
terms of the original order. In the interim, however, the market prices
for a security may have moved, and the subsequent error correction
transaction may be effected at a price that is no longer within the
national best protected bid and offer.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Letter to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Commission, from Jerry
O'Connell, Chairman, SIFMA Trading Committee, dated May 1, 2007
(``SIFMA Exemption Request'').
    \7\ Id. at 2.
    \8\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to the SIFMA Exemption Request, broker-dealers seeking to
execute error corrections, if required to comply with Rule 611, would
need to satisfy all better-priced protected quotations prior to
effecting the error correction transaction.\9\ Although some error
correction transactions that are ``underwater'' within the meaning of
the stopped order exception in Rule

611(b)(9) could qualify for such exception, the SIFMA Exemption Request
states that there are many instances in which bona fide errors need to
be remedied, but may not meet the definition of an underwater trade.
The inability of broker-dealers to correct all bona fide errors in a
manner consistent with a customer's original order without incurring
additional expense would impede the effective correction of trading
errors. As a result, SIFMA believes that all bona fide error correction
transactions, including those not underwater, merit a specific
exemption from Rule 611.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Id.
    \10\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The SIFMA Exemption Request states that the benefits of the
requested exemption would far outweigh any disadvantages.\11\ The
exemption would facilitate the ability of broker-dealers to provide
fair remediation to customers who otherwise would suffer economic
consequences as a result of inadvertent mistakes or system failures.
Also, the SIFMA Exemption Requests asserts that the number of bona fide
error correction transactions is likely to be small in comparison to
the total number of trades executed in NMS stocks, so that the number
of exempted trade-throughs would not unduly detract from the objectives
of Rule 611.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Id. at 5.
    \12\ Id. at 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion

    The Commission has decided to exempt trading centers from the
requirement in Rule 611(a) to establish, maintain, and enforce written
policies and procedures that are reasonably designed to prevent trade-
throughs when the transaction that constituted the trade-through meets
the following terms and conditions (``Error Correction Transaction''):
    (1) The trading center effects the transaction solely to correct a
``bona fide error,'' \13\ which is defined as: (i) The inaccurate
conveyance or execution of any term of an order including, but not
limited to, price, number of shares or other unit of trading;
identification of the security; identification of the account for which
securities are purchased or sold; lost or otherwise misplaced order
tickets; short sales that were instead sold long or vice versa; or the
execution of an order on the wrong side of a market; (ii) the
unauthorized or unintended purchase, sale, or allocation of securities,
or the failure to follow specific client instructions; (iii) the
incorrect entry of data into relevant systems, including reliance on
incorrect cash positions, withdrawals, or securities positions
reflected in an account; or (iv) a delay, outage, or failure of a
communication system used to transmit market data prices or to
facilitate the delivery or execution of an order.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ The exemption solely addresses the status of a transaction
under Rule 611. It presumes that the trading center has complied
with all requirements applicable to error transactions, including
SRO rules.
    \14\ Absent a bona fide error as defined above, the exemption
does not apply to a broker-dealer's mere failure to execute a not-
held order in accordance with a customer's expectations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) The bona fide error is evidenced by objective facts and
circumstances, and the trading center maintains documentation of such
facts and circumstances;
    (3) The trading center records the transaction in its error
account;
    (4) The trading center establishes, maintains, and enforces written
policies and procedures that are reasonably designed to address the
occurrence of errors and, in the event of an error, the use and terms
of a transaction to correct the error in compliance with this
exemption; and
    (5) The trading center regularly surveils to ascertain the
effectiveness of its policies and procedures to address errors and
transactions to correct errors and takes prompt action to remedy
deficiencies in such policies and procedures.
    The exemption applies only to the Error Correction Transaction
itself. It does not, for example, apply to any subsequent trades
effected by a trading center to eliminate a proprietary position
connected with the Error Correction Transaction.
    The Commission believes that an exemption for Error Correction
Transactions is appropriate to promote efficiency and the best
execution of investor orders.\15\ The exemption will allow trading
centers to execute Error Correction Transactions at the appropriate
prices to correct bona fide errors without a requirement to prevent
trade-throughs of the current protected quotations or to qualify for
one of the exceptions in Rule 611(b). It thereby will minimize the
expense incurred by trading centers to remedy certain errors in a
manner consistent with their customers' orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Exchange Act Section 11A(a)(1)(C)(i) and (iv) (assuring
efficient execution of securities transactions and the
practicability of executing investors' orders in the best market are
two of the primary objectives for the national market system).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the terms of the exemption are designed to minimize
the potential for abuse, such as claiming its applicability to
transactions other than those to correct bona fide errors. For example,
a bona fide error must be evidenced by objective facts and
circumstances, and the trading center must document such facts and
circumstances. A trading center must record the Error Correction
Transaction in an error account and implement policies and procedures
that reasonably address errors and the use of Error Correction
Transactions. A trading center's use of the exemption therefore should
be readily reviewable by the applicable regulatory authorities.
    Finally, Error Correction Transactions should represent a very
small percentage of the total number of trades in NMS stocks. The
exemption therefore should not significantly detract from the policy
objectives of Rule 611.
    For the foregoing reasons, the Commission finds that granting the
foregoing exemption is necessary and appropriate in the public
interest, and is consistent with the protection of investors.

IV. Conclusion

    It is hereby ordered, pursuant to Rule 611(d) of Regulation NMS,
that trading centers shall be exempt from the requirement in Rule
611(a) to establish, maintain, and enforce written policies and
procedures that are reasonably designed to prevent trade-throughs when
the transaction that constituted the trade-through qualifies as an
Error Correction Transaction, as defined above.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(82).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-11439 Filed 6-13-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register: May 5, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 87)]
[Notices]
[Page 26486-26487]
[DOCID:fr05my06-51]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP06-315-000]

Northern Natural Gas Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC
Gas Tariff

April 27, 2006.
    Take notice that on April 20, 2006, Northern Natural Gas Company
(Northern), tendered for filing to become part of its FERC Gas Tariff,
Fifth Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets:

Sixth Revised Sheet No. 154.

Seventh Revised Sheet No. 154.

    Northern states that it is filing the above-referenced tariff
sheets to make several revisions to its Rate Schedule MPS pooling
service.
    Northern further states that copies of the filing have been mailed
to each of its customers and interested State Commissions.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of
section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210).
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-6829 Filed 5-4-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 134 (Wednesday, July 13, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41248-41250]
[FR Doc No: 2011-17615]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2003-0200; FRL-8879-5]

Fenamiphos; Notice of Receipt of Request to Amend Use Deletion
and Product Cancellation Order

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces EPA's notice of receipt of a request to
amend the order for the cancellation of products, voluntarily requested
by the registrant and accepted by the Agency, containing the pesticide
fenamiphos, pursuant to section 6(f)(1) of the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), as amended. This request
follows a December 10, 2008 Federal Register Amendment to Use Deletion
and Product Cancellation Order, which extended the deadline for persons
other than the registrant to sell and distribute one fenamiphos
product, Nemacur 3 Emulsifiable Systemic Insecticide-Nematicide, from
November 30, 2008 until March 31, 2009. The Agency subsequently
received a request from an end user to extend the sale and distribution
deadline for Nemacur 3. If this request is granted, the Agency will
extend the deadline for persons other than the registrant to sell and
distribute Nemacur 3 Emulsifiable Systemic Insecticide-Nematicide (EPA
Reg. No. 264-731) for 1 year from the date of publication of the
amended order. Additionally, the Agency intends to prohibit use of
existing stocks of all fenamiphos products 3 years from the date of
publication of the amended order.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 12, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2003-0200, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
    Submit written withdrawal request by mail to: Pesticide Re-
evaluation Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001. ATTN: Eric Miederhoff.
     Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket Facility's normal hours of operation (8:30
a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays).
Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. The Docket Facility telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2003-0200. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the docket without change and may be made available on-line at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or e-
mail. The regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through regulations.gov,
your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part
of the comment that is placed in the docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other

contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or
CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the docket index
available at http://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet
and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly
available docket materials are available either in the electronic
docket at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard
copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac
Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The hours of
operation of this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric Miederhoff, Pesticide Re-
evaluation Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of
interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human
health, and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry; fenamiphos
pesticide users; and members of the public interested in the sale,
distribution, or use of pesticides. Since others also may be
interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific
entities that may be affected by this action. If you have any questions
regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity,
consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

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

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

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

    1. Docket. EPA has established a docket for this action under
docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2003-0200. Publicly
available docket materials are available either in the electronic
docket at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard
copy, at the Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal
Dr., Arlington, VA. The hours of operation of this Docket Facility are
from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The Docket Facility telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    2. Electronic access. You may access this Federal Register document
electronically through the EPA Internet under the Federal Register
listings at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr.

II. What action is the agency taking?

    This notice announces the proposed amendment of the December 10,
2003 use deletion and product cancellation order of fenamiphos products
registered under section 3 of FIFRA, as amended on June 11, 2008 and
December 10, 2008. The only registration that would be affected by the
extension of the sale and distribution date is Nemacur 3 Emulsifiable
Systemic Insecticide-Nematicide, EPA Registration Number 264-731. The
prohibition on the use of fenamiphos products 3 years after publication
of the amended order would affect all fenamiphos product registrations.
    On December 10, 2003, EPA published a Use Deletion and Product
Cancellation Order in the Federal Register (68 FR 68901) (FRL-7332-5).
The order prohibited, among other things, the manufacture and
distribution of fenamiphos by Bayer Corporation, the sole technical
registrant, after May 31, 2007, the effective cancellation date for the
fenamiphos product registrations. The deadline established for Bayer
Corporation followed a production cap on the manufacture of fenamiphos,
which limited fenamiphos production to 500,000 pounds of active
ingredient for the year ending May 31, 2003, and reduced production by
20% each subsequent year during the 5 year phase-out period. The order
also prohibited the sale and distribution of fenamiphos by persons
other than the registrant after May 31, 2008. These provisions were
intended to provide a reasonable amount of time for the material to
move through the channels of trade following the cessation of sale and
distribution of fenamiphos products by the registrant on May 31, 2007.
    In a June 11, 2008 Federal Register Amendment to Use Deletion and
Product Cancellation Order (73 FR 33082) (FRL-8368-2), the Agency
extended the May 31, 2008 deadline on the sale and distribution by
persons other than the registrant through November 30, 2008. This
action was taken in response to a request from the sole fenamiphos
technical registrant, Bayer Environmental Science, to extend the
deadline to allow distributors to sell existing stockpiles of Nemacur
10% Turf and Ornamental Nematicide (EPA Reg. No. 432-1291) and Nemacur
3 Emulsifiable Systemic Insecticide-

Nematicide (EPA Reg. No. 264-731) to end users.
    In a December 10, 2008 Federal Register (73 FR 75097) (FRL-8389-8)
Amendment to Use Deletion and Product Cancellation Order, the Agency
further extended the November 30, 2008 deadline for the sale and
distribution of Nemacur 3 Emulsifiable Systemic Insceticide-Nematicide
(EPA Reg. No. 264-731) through March 31, 2009. This action was taken in
response to a request from an end user, Maui Pineapple, to extend the
deadline for sale and distribution of Nemacur 3 Emulsifiable Systemic
Insecticide-Nematicide (EPA Reg. No. 264-731) from November 30, 2008 to
March 31, 2009.
    On August 20, 2010 the Agency received another request from Maui
Pineapple to extend the deadline for sale and distribution of Nemacur 3
Emulsifiable Systemic Insecticide-Nematicide (EPA Reg. No. 264-731) to
allow a transfer of its remaining stocks of Nemacur 3 to other end
users.
    The original May 31, 2008 deadline for fenamiphos was established
to provide a reasonable amount of time for the material to move through
the channels of trade following the cessation of sale and distribution
of fenamiphos products by the registrant, Bayer Environmental Science,
on May 31, 2007. Extending the deadline for distributors to sell and
distribute Nemacur 3 Emulsifiable Systemic Insecticide-Nematicide would
neither conflict with the Agency's application of the guidelines
outlined in PR Notice 97-7, nor would it introduce more fenamiphos into
the pesticide use cycle than had been stipulated by the terms of the 5
year phase-out. The extension would allow for a redistribution of
existing material already in the hands of end users and no new
fenamiphos products would enter the marketplace. If this request is
granted, the Agency will extend the deadline for persons other than the
registrant to sell and distribute Nemacur 3 Emulsifiable Systemic
Insecticide-Nematicide (EPA Reg. No. 264-731) for 1 year from the date
of publication of the amended order.
    However, the Agency also intends to prohibit use of all fenamiphos
products in the United States 3 years from the date of publication of
the amended order in the Federal Register. Previously, the Agency had
allowed end users with existing stocks of products containing
fenamiphos to continue to use these products until their stocks were
exhausted, provided that the use complied with previously EPA-approved
product label requirements for the respective products. Considering the
initial Product Cancellation Order for fenamiphos was issued in 2003,
if the Agency permits a further extension, 11 years will have elapsed
since the initial cancellation order was issued, and approximately 7
years will have elapsed from the effective cancellation of the
fenamiphos products. When the Agency specified in the initial Product
Cancellation Order that users may use existing stocks until exhausted,
it did not anticipate that fenamiphos products would not move through
the channels of trade and be depleted by end users in a timely manner.
    Moreover, all pesticides sold or distributed in the United States
generally must be registered by the EPA, based on scientific data
showing that they will not cause unreasonable risks to human health or
the environment when used as directed on product labeling. Due to the
fact that fenamiphos product registrations were canceled as part of the
voluntary phase-out, the Agency has determined that the registration
review program, the periodic evaluation of pesticide safety, is not
applicable to fenamiphos. The registration review of fenamiphos would
have begun in 2008 if fenamiphos had active product registrations at
that time. The Agency is concerned that the use of existing stocks of
fenamiphos products has continued for an extended period since the last
scientific risks assessments of its use, which were completed for the
2002 Fenamiphos Reregistration Eligibility Decision. Therefore, the
Agency intends to prohibit all use of pesticide products containing
fenamiphos 3 years from the date of publication of the amended order in
the Federal Register.

III. What is the agency's authority for taking this action?

    Section 6(a)(1) of FIFRA provides that the Administrator may permit
the continued sale and use of existing stocks of a pesticide whose
registration is suspended or canceled under this section, or section 3
or 4, to such extent, under such conditions, and for such uses as the
Administrator determines that such sale or use is not inconsistent with
the purposes of this Act.

IV. Proposed Order Amendment

    Pursuant to FIFRA section 6(a), EPA is proposing to amend the
December 10, 2008 order to allow persons other than the registrant to
sell and distribute the fenamiphos product, Nemacur 3 Emulsifiable
Systemic Insecticide-Nematicide (EPA Registration Number 264-731), for
1 year from the publication of the amended order. Accordingly, the
Agency is proposing to order that the sale and distribution of products
containing fenamiphos is prohibited, except for proper disposal or
export pursuant to section 17 of FIFRA, provided, however, that persons
other than the registrant are permitted to sell and distribute existing
stocks of Nemacur 3 Emulsifiable Systemic Insecticide-Nematicide (EPA
Registration Number 264-731) for 1 year from the publication of the
amended order. The Agency further proposes to order that end users with
existing stocks of any products containing fenamiphos may continue to
use these products for 3 years from the date of publication of the
amended order in the Federal Register, provided that the use complies
with EPA-approved product label requirements for the respective
products.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Pesticides and pests.

    Dated: July 1, 2011.
Richard P. Keigwin, Jr.,
Director, Pesticide Re-evaluation Division, Office of Pesticide
Programs.
[FR Doc. 2011-17615 Filed 7-12-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 107 (Monday, June 5, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 36476-36477]
[FR Doc No: 2023-11879]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2023-0376]

Safety Zone; Annual Events in the Captain of the Port Buffalo
Zone

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notification of enforcement of regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce a Safety Zone for the Boldt
Castle Independence Day Fireworks on July 4, 2023, to provide for the
safety of life on navigable waterways during this event. Our regulation
for marine events within the Ninth Coast Guard District identifies the
regulated area for this event in Alexandria Bay, NY. During the
enforcement period, the operator of any vessel in the regulated area
must comply with directions from the Patrol Commander or any Official
Patrol displaying a Coast Guard ensign.

DATES: The regulations in 33 CFR 165.939 will be enforced for the Boldt
Castle 4th of July Fireworks regulated area listed in item b.13 in the
table to Sec.  165.939 from 9 p.m. through 10:30 p.m. on July 4, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
notification of enforcement, call or email MST1 Julio Maldonado,
Waterways Management Division Representative, U.S. Coast Guard MSD
Massena; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard will enforce a safety zone
in 33 CFR 165.939 for the Boldt Castle 4th of July Fireworks regulated
area from 9 p.m. through 10:30 p.m. on July 4, 2023. This action is
being taken to provide for the safety of life on navigable waterways
during this event. Our regulation for marine events within the Ninth
Coast Guard District, Sec.  165.939, specifies the location of the
regulated area for the Boldt Castle 4th of July Fireworks which
encompasses portions of the St. Lawrence River. During the enforcement
period as reflected in Sec.  165.939, if you are the operator of a
vessel in the regulated area you must comply with directions from the
Patrol Commander or any Official Patrol displaying a Coast Guard
ensign.
    In addition to this notification of enforcement in the Federal
Register, the Coast Guard plans to provide notification of this
enforcement period via the Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

    Dated: May 26, 2023.
J.B. Bybee,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Buffalo, By direction.
[FR Doc. 2023-11879 Filed 6-2-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P