[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 189 (Monday, October 4, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54777-54780]
[FR Doc No: 2021-21484]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-93148; File No. SR-CboeBYX-2021-022]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend
the Exchange's Fee Schedule

September 28, 2021.
    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 September 21, 2021, Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc. (``Exchange'' or
``BYX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. The 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

    Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``BYX'' or ``BYX
Equities'') proposes to amend its Fee Schedule. The text of the
proposed rule change is provided in Exhibit 5.
    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's website (http://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/regulation/rule_filings/byx/), at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary, and at
the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend its Fee Schedule applicable to its
equities trading platform (``BYX Equities'') to modify the rebate
associated with certain routing fee codes and eliminate certain routing
fee codes.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Exchange initially filed the proposed fee changes
September 1, 2021 (SR-CboeBYX-2021-019). On September 13, 2021, the
Exchange withdrew that filing and re-submitted the proposed fee
changes (SR-CboeBZX-2021-021). On September 21, 2021, the Exchange
withdrew that filing and re-submitted this proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange first notes that it operates in a highly competitive
market in which market participants can readily direct order flow to
competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be
excessive or incentives to be insufficient. More specifically, the
Exchange is only one of 16 registered equities exchanges, as well

as a number of alternative trading systems and other off-exchange
venues that do not have similar self-regulatory responsibilities under
the Exchange Act, to which market participants may direct their order
flow. Based on publicly available information,\4\ no single registered
equities exchange has more than 14% of the market share. Thus, in such
a low-concentrated and highly competitive market, no single equities
exchange possesses significant pricing power in the execution of order
flow. The Exchange believes that the ever-shifting market share among
the exchanges from month to month demonstrates that market participants
can shift order flow, discontinue, or reduce use of certain categories
of products, in response to fee changes. Accordingly, competitive
forces constrain the Exchange's transaction fees, and market
participants can readily trade on competing venues if they deem pricing
levels at those other venues to be more favorable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Cboe Global Markets, U.S. Equities Market Volume
Summary, Month-to-Date (August 26, 2021), available at https://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/market_statistics/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange assesses fees and provides rebates in connection with
orders routed away to various exchanges. Now, the Exchange proposes to
modify certain routing fee codes currently under the Fee Codes and
Associated Fees section of the Fee Schedule. First, the Exchange
proposes to modify fee code C, which is appended to orders routed to
Nasdaq BX, Inc. (``Nasdaq BX'') using destination specific, TRIM or
SLIM routing strategies, and currently provides a rebate of $0.00100
per share. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to reduce the rebate to
$0.00050 per share.
    Second, the Exchange proposes to modify fee code NX, which is
appended to orders routed to NYSE National, Inc. (``NYSE National'')
using the TRIM or SLIM routing strategy, and currently provides a
rebate of $0.00200 per share. The Exchange proposes to reduce the
rebate to $0.00050 per share.
    Finally, as a result of minimal use in the last months, the
Exchange proposes to eliminate fee codes BO, IX, and SX in their
entirety. Fee code BO is appended to orders routed using a destination
specific routing strategy unless otherwise specified, and currently
assesses a fee of $0.00300 per share. Fee code IX is appended to orders
routed to the Investors Exchange LLC (``IEX'') using a destination
specific routing strategy, and currently assesses a fee of $0.00300 per
share. Fee code SX is appended to orders routed using the SLIM routing
strategy (except to Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (``BZX Equities''), Cboe
EDGA Exchange, Inc. (``EDGA Equities'') Nasdaq BX, NYSE American LLC
(``NYSE American'') or NYSE National), and currently assesses a fee of
$0.00290 per share. The Exchange believes that because so few users
elect to route their orders with specifications to which fee code BO,
IX, or SX is applicable, the current demand does not warrant the
infrastructure and ongoing Systems maintenance required to support the
separate fee codes. Therefore, the Exchange now proposes to delete fee
code BO, IX, and SX in the Fee Schedule. The Exchange notes that users
will continue to be able to choose to route their orders with the same
specifications to which fee codes BO, IX, and SX currently applies--
such orders will simply be assessed the fees currently in place for
routed orders generally.\5\ That is, if any of the routed orders to
which fee code BO, IX, or SX currently apply fee code X will be
appended to such orders, which assesses a fee of $0.00300 per share.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Exchange notes that there are other fee codes that apply
to certain other routing specifications, however, those routed
orders not otherwise specified in such other routing fee code
descriptions yield the general routing fee code X.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the objectives of Section 6 of the Act,\6\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4),\7\ in particular, as it is
designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues,
fees and other charges among its Members and issuers and other persons
using its facilities. The Exchange also believes that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) \8\
requirements that the rules of an exchange be designed to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination
with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing
information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in
securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest, and, particularly, is not
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As described above, the Exchange operates in a highly competitive
market in which market participants can readily direct order flow to
competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be
excessive or incentives to be insufficient. The Exchange believes that
its proposal to reduce the rebates applicable to fee codes C and NX is
fair, equitable, and reasonable because the proposed fees and rebate
remain consistent with pricing offered by the Exchange's affiliates and
competitors and does not represent a significant departure from the
Exchange's general pricing structure. Specifically, the proposed
rebates applicable to fee codes C and NX are more than that offered by
the Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq''), which does not provide a
standard rebate for similar orders.\9\ Therefore, the Exchange believes
the proposed rebates associated with fee codes C and NX remain
consistent with pricing previously offered by the Exchange's affiliates
and other exchanges and does not represent a significant departure from
such pricing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See ``Route Rates'' on the Nasdaq fee schedule at http://nasdaqtrader.com/Trader.aspx?id=PriceListTrading2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change to remove fee code
BO, IX, and SX is reasonable as the Exchange has observed a minimal
amount of volume in orders yielding the fee code and, therefore, the
continuation of these fee codes does not warrant the infrastructure and
ongoing Systems maintenance required to support separate fee codes for
specific routed orders. As such, the Exchange also believes that is
reasonable and equitable to assess routed orders which meet the
specifications to which fee code BO, IX, and SX are currently
applicable the standard routing fee currently in place for all other
routed orders--via fee code X. The fee associated with fee code X is
$0.00300, which is the same as the fee currently assessed for orders
yielding fee code BO and IX, and is only slightly higher than the fee
currently assessed for fee code SX. The Exchange believes that the
proposed rule change is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory
because Members will continue to have the option to elect to route
their orders in the same manner and will be automatically and uniformly
assessed the applicable standard rates in place for generally all other
routed orders. Further, if members do not favor the Exchange's pricing
for routed orders, they can send their routable orders directly to away
markets instead of using routing functionality provided by the
Exchange. Routing through the Exchange is optional, and the Exchange

operates in a competitive environment where market participants can
readily direct order flow to competing venues or providers of routing
services if they deem fee levels to be excessive.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule changes will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange does not believe
that the proposed modifications represent a significant departure from
previous pricing offered by the Exchange or pricing offered by the
Exchange's competitors. Further, while the Exchange is proposing to
eliminate fee codes BO, IX, and SX orders that meet specifications of
fee code BO, IX, or SX going forward will be assessed the rate for
orders routed generally. Members may opt to disfavor the Exchange's
pricing if they believe that alternatives offer them better value.
Accordingly, the Exchange does not believe that the proposed change
will impair the ability of Members or competing venues to maintain
their competitive standing in the financial markets.
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change does not impose any
burden on intramarket competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Particularly, the proposed
fee and rebate modifications will continue to apply to all Members
equally, and as noted above, orders currently meeting the
specifications of fee code BO, IX, or SX will be assessed the rate for
orders routed generally under fee code X. The Exchange believes the
proposed rule change does not impose any burden on intermarket
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. As previously discussed, the Exchange operates in
a highly competitive market. Members have numerous alternative venues
that they may participate on and direct their order flow, including
other equities exchanges, off-exchange venues, and alternative trading
systems. Additionally, the Exchange represents a small percentage of
the overall market. Based on publicly available information, no single
equities exchange has more than 14% of the market share.\10\ Therefore,
no exchange possesses significant pricing power in the execution of
order flow. Indeed, participants can readily choose to send their
orders to other exchange and off-exchange venues if they deem fee
levels at those other venues to be more favorable. Moreover, the
Commission has repeatedly expressed its preference for competition over
regulatory intervention in determining prices, products, and services
in the securities markets. Specifically, in Regulation NMS, the
Commission highlighted the importance of market forces in determining
prices and SRO revenues and, also, recognized that current regulation
of the market system ``has been remarkably successful in promoting
market competition in its broader forms that are most important to
investors and listed companies.'' \11\ The fact that this market is
competitive has also long been recognized by the courts. In
NetCoalition v. Securities and Exchange Commission, the D.C. Circuit
stated as follows: ``[n]o one disputes that competition for order flow
is `fierce.' . . . As the SEC explained, `[i]n the U.S. national market
system, buyers and sellers of securities, and the broker-dealers that
act as their order-routing agents, have a wide range of choices of
where to route orders for execution'; [and] `no exchange can afford to
take its market share percentages for granted' because `no exchange
possesses a monopoly, regulatory or otherwise, in the execution of
order flow from broker dealers'. . . .''.\12\ Accordingly, the Exchange
does not believe its proposed fee change imposes any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Supra note 3.
    \11\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005).
    \12\ NetCoalition v. SEC, 615 F.3d 525, 539 (D.C. Cir. 2010)
(quoting Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59039 (December 2,
2008), 73 FR 74770, 74782-83 (December 9, 2008) (SR-NYSEArca-2006-
21)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective upon filing pursuant
to Section 19(b)(3)(A) \13\ of the Act and paragraph (f)(2) of Rule
19b-4 \14\ thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other
charge imposed by the Exchange. At any time within 60 days of the
filing of such 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. If the Commission takes such action, the
Commission shall institute proceedings under Section 19(b)(2)(B) \15\
of the Act to determine whether the proposed rule change should be
approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-CboeBYX-2021-022 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CboeBYX-2021-022. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email 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 website (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 website 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 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing will also be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from

comment submissions. You should submit only information that you wish
to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number
SR-CboeBYX-2021-022 and should be submitted on or before October 25,
2021.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-21484 Filed 10-1-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 172 (Thursday, September 7, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61611-61612]
[FR Doc No: 2023-19294]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2008-0010]

Board of Visitors for the National Fire Academy

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland
Security.

ACTION: Notice of open Federal advisory committee meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Board of Visitors for the National Fire Academy (Board)
will meet virtually on Wednesday, December 13, 2023. The meeting will
be open to the public.

DATES: The meeting will take place on Wednesday, December 13, 2023, 2
p.m. to 4 p.m. Eastern Time. Please note that the meeting may close
early if the Board has completed its business.

ADDRESSES: Members of the public who wish to participate in the virtual
conference should contact Deborah Gartrell-Kemp as listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by close of business on December 1,
2023, to obtain the call-in number and access code for the December
13th virtual meeting. For more information on services for individuals
with disabilities or to request special assistance, contact Deborah
Gartrell-Kemp as soon as possible. The Board is committed to ensuring
all participants have equal access regardless of disability status. If
you require a reasonable accommodation due to a disability to fully
participate, please contact Deborah Gartrell-Kemp as listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section as soon as possible.
    To facilitate public participation, we are inviting public comment
on the issues to be considered by the Board as listed in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section. Participants seeking to have their
comments considered during the meeting should submit them in advance or
during the public comment segment. Comments submitted up to 30 days
after the meeting will be included in the public record and may be
considered at the next meeting. Comments submitted in advance must be
identified by Docket ID FEMA-2008-0010 and may be submitted by one of
the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Electronic Delivery: Email Deborah Gartrell-Kemp at
[email protected] no later than December 1, 2023, for
consideration at the December 13, 2023 meeting.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the words
``Federal Emergency Management Agency'' and the Docket ID for this
action. Comments received will be posted without alteration at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. You
may wish to view the Privacy and Security Notice via a link on the
homepage of www.regulations.gov.
    Docket: For access to the docket and to read background documents
or comments received by the National Fire Academy Board of Visitors, go
to http://www.regulations.gov, click on ``Advanced Search,'' then enter
``FEMA-2008-0010'' in the ``By Docket ID'' box, then select ``FEMA''
under ``By Agency,'' and then click ``Search.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    Designated Federal Officer: Eriks Gabliks, telephone (301) 447-
1117, email [email protected].
    Logistical Information: Deborah Gartrell-Kemp, telephone (301) 447-
7230, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Board will meet virtually on Tuesday,
December 13, 2023. The meeting will be open to the public. Notice of
this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5
U.S.C. ch. 10.

Purpose of the Board

    The purpose of the Board is to review annually the programs of the
National Fire Academy (Academy) and advise the Administrator of the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), through the United States
Fire Administrator, on the operation of the Academy and any
improvements therein that the Board deems appropriate. In carrying out
its responsibilities, the Board examines Academy programs to determine
whether these programs further the basic missions that are approved by
the Administrator of FEMA, examines the physical plant of the Academy
to determine the adequacy of the Academy's facilities, and examines the
funding levels for Academy programs. Annually, the Board submits a
written report through the United States Fire Administrator to the FEMA
Administrator.. The report provides detailed comments and
recommendations regarding Academy operations.
    Agenda
    On Tuesday, December 13, 2023, there will be four sessions, with
deliberations and voting at the end of each session as necessary:
    1. The Board will discuss United States Fire Administration,
National Fire and Emergency Medical Services and National Fire Data and
Research.
    2. The Board will discuss deferred maintenance and capital
improvements on the National Emergency Training Center campus and
fiscal year 2024 and beyond Budget Request/Budget Planning.
    3. The Board will deliberate and vote on recommendations on Academy
program activities to include developments, deliveries, staffing,
admissions and strategic plan.
    4. There will also be an update on the Board of Visitors
Subcommittee Groups for the Professional Development Initiative Update
and the National Fire Incident Report System.
    There will be a 10-minute comment period after each agenda item and
each speaker will be given no more than 2 minutes to speak. Please note
that the public comment periods after each agenda item may end earlier
that the allotted 10 minutes, following the last call for comments.
Contact Deborah Gartrell-Kemp to register as a speaker. Meeting
materials will be posted by December 1, 2023, at https://www.usfa.fema.gov/nfa/about/board-of-visitors.html.

Eriks J. Gabliks,
Superintendent, National Fire Academy, United States Fire
Administration, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2023-19294 Filed 9-6-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-74-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 134 (Thursday, July 14, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42173-42176]
[FR Doc No: 2022-15051]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. PF22-5-000]

Notice of Scoping Period Requesting Comments on Environmental
Issues for the Planned Wisconsin Reliability Project and Notice of
Public Scoping Session; ANR Pipeline Company

    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or
Commission) will prepare an environmental document that will discuss
the environmental impacts of the Wisconsin Reliability Project
involving construction and operation of facilities by ANR Pipeline
Company (ANR) in Sheboygan, Waupaca, Washington, Marathon, Portage,
Manitowoc, Merrill, Oconto, Outagamie, and Winnebago counties
Wisconsin, and McHenry County, Illinois. The Commission will use this
environmental document in its decision-making process to determine
whether the project is 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 regarding the project. As part of the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) review process, the Commission takes into account
concerns the public may have about proposals and the environmental
impacts that could result from its action whenever it considers the
issuance of a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. This
gathering of public input is referred to as ``scoping.'' The main goal
of the scoping process is to focus the analysis in the environmental
document on the important environmental issues. Additional information
about the Commission's NEPA process is described below in the NEPA
Process and Environmental Document section of this notice.
    By this notice, the Commission requests public comments on the
scope of issues to address in the environmental document. To ensure
that your comments are timely and properly recorded, please submit your
comments so that the Commission receives them in Washington, DC on or
before 5 p.m. Eastern Time on August 8, 2022. Comments may be submitted
in written or oral form. Further details on how to submit comments are
provided in the Public Participation section of this notice.
    Your comments should focus on the potential environmental effects,
reasonable alternatives, and measures to avoid or lessen environmental
impacts. Your input will help the Commission staff determine what
issues they need to evaluate in the environmental document. Commission
staff will consider all written or oral comments during the preparation
of the environmental document.
    If you submitted comments on this project to the Commission before
the opening of this docket on April 4, 2022, you will need to file
those comments in Docket No. PF22-5-000 to ensure they are considered.
    This notice is being sent to the Commission's current environmental
mailing list for this project. State and local government
representatives should notify their constituents of this planned
project and encourage them to comment on their areas of concern.
    If you are a landowner receiving this notice, a pipeline company
representative may contact you about the acquisition of an easement to
construct, operate, and maintain the planned facilities. The company
would seek to negotiate a mutually acceptable easement agreement. You
are not required to enter into an agreement. However, if the Commission
approves the project, the Natural Gas Act conveys the right of eminent
domain to the company. Therefore, if you and the company do not reach
an easement agreement, the pipeline company could initiate condemnation
proceedings in court. In such instances, compensation would be
determined by a judge in accordance with state law. The Commission does
not subsequently grant, exercise, or oversee the exercise of that
eminent domain authority. The courts have exclusive authority to handle
eminent domain cases; the Commission has no jurisdiction over these
matters.
    A fact sheet prepared by the FERC entitled ``An Interstate Natural
Gas Facility On My Land? What Do I Need To Know?'' addresses typically
asked questions, including the use of eminent domain and how to
participate in the Commission's proceedings. This fact sheet along with
other landowner topics of interest are available for viewing on the
FERC website (www.ferc.gov) under the links to Natural Gas Questions or
Landowner Topics.

Public Participation

    There are four methods you can use to submit your comments to the
Commission. Please carefully follow these instructions so that your
comments are properly recorded. The Commission encourages electronic
filing of comments and has staff available to assist you at (866) 208-
3676 or [email protected].
    (1) You can file your comments electronically using the eComment
feature, which is located on the Commission's website (www.ferc.gov)
under the link to FERC Online. Using eComment is an easy method for
submitting brief, text-only comments on a project;
    (2) You can file your comments electronically by using the eFiling
feature, which is located on the Commission's website (www.ferc.gov)
under the link to FERC Online. 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 can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to
the Commission. Be sure to reference the project docket number (PF22-5-
000) on your letter. Submissions sent via the U.S. Postal Service must
be addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street NE, Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426.
Submissions sent via any other carrier must be addressed to:

Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    (4) In lieu of sending written comments, the Commission invites you
to attend one of the virtual public scoping sessions its staff will
conduct by telephone, scheduled as follows:

Date and Time

Wednesday, July 27, 2022, 6:00 p.m. CST, Call in number:<PHONE_NUMBER>,
Participant passcode: 3472916
Thursday, July 28, 2022, 5:00 p.m. CST, Call in number:<PHONE_NUMBER>,
Participant passcode: 3472916

    The primary goal of these scoping sessions is to have you identify
the specific environmental issues and concerns that should be
considered in the environmental document. Note that the scoping
sessions will start at the time stated above and will end once all
participants wishing to comment have had the opportunity to do so, or
at 8:00 p.m. CST on July 27, and 7:00 p.m. on July 28, whichever comes
first. Individual oral comments will be taken one at a time with a
court reporter present on the line.
    There will be a brief introduction by Commission staff when the
session opens, so please attempt to call in at the beginning of the
session. All participants will be able to hear the comments provided by
other participants; however, all lines will remain closed during the
comments of others and then opened one at a time for providing
comments. Once you call in, the operator will provide directions on how
to indicate you would like to provide a comment. A time limit of three
minutes may be implemented for each commentor.
    Your oral comments will be recorded by the court reporter and
become part of the public record for this proceeding. Transcripts of
all comments received during the scoping sessions will be publicly
available on FERC's eLibrary system (see the last page of this notice
for instructions on using eLibrary).
    It is important to note that the Commission provides equal
consideration to all comments received, whether filed in written form
or provided orally at a virtual scoping session.
    Additionally, the Commission offers a free service called
eSubscription, which makes it easy to stay informed of all issuances
and submittals regarding the dockets/projects to which you subscribe.
These instant email notifications are the fastest way to receive
notification and provide a link to the document files which can reduce
the amount of time you spend researching proceedings. Go to https://www.ferc.gov/ferc-online/overview to register for eSubscription.

Summary of the Planned Project

    ANR plans to construct and operate the facilities, detailed below,
in Sheboygan, Waupaca, Oconto, Merrill, Winnebago, Marathon, Portage,
Outagamie, and Manitowoc counties, Wisconsin, and McHenry County,
Illinois. The Wisconsin Reliability Project would provide about 150,000
dekatherms of natural gas per day to the state of Wisconsin. According
to ANR, its project would provide much needed natural gas supply to
meet the increasing market demand of residential, commercial, and
industrial consumers in the State of Wisconsin, while increasing the
reliability and efficiency of ANR's existing system.
    The Wisconsin Reliability Project would consist of the following
facilities:
     Installation of two new 3,750 horsepower (hp) Dual Drive
Technologies, Ltd.TM (dual-drive) \1\ compressor units,
removal of five existing compressor units, and uprate of one existing
unit at the existing Kewaskum Compressor Station in Sheboygan County,
Wisconsin;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Dual Drive Technologies, Ltd.TM units are
redundant prime mover systems comprised of a combination electric
motor connected to an engine for powering a gas compressor. These
units can switch between electricity and natural gas in the event of
an abnormal operating event (e.g., power outage) to provide enhanced
system reliability and maintain customer commitments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Installation of two new 3,750 hp dual-drive compressor
units, removal of one existing compressor unit, and upsizing of station
inlet and discharge piping at the existing Weyauwega Compressor Station
in Waupaca County, Wisconsin;
     Replacement of approximately 48 miles of existing 14-inch-
diameter and 22-inch-diameter Line 301 and 24-inch-diameter Line 226
with 30 and 36-inch-diameter pipeline in the counties of Washington,
Waupaca, Outagamie, and Winnebago, Wisconsin, as well as McHenry
County, Illinois;
     Expansion of the existing Lena, Merrill, Oshkosh, South
Wausau, Stevens Point, and Two Rivers meter stations to accommodate
deliveries of incremental capacity in the counties of Oconto, Merrill,
Winnebago, Marathon, Portage, and Manitowoc, Wisconsin; and
     Other minor appurtenant facilities.
    The general location of the project facilities is shown in appendix
1.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The appendices referenced in this notice will not appear in
the Federal Register. Copies of the appendices were sent to all
those receiving this notice in the mail and are available at
www.ferc.gov using the link called ``eLibrary''. For instructions on
connecting to eLibrary, refer to the last page of this notice. At
this time, the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's
Public Reference Room due to the proclamation declaring a National
Emergency concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19),
issued by the President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact
FERC at [email protected] or call toll free,<PHONE_NUMBER>
or TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Land Requirements for Construction

    Construction of the planned facilities would disturb about 928.9
acres of land for the aboveground facilities upgrades and pipeline
modifications. Following construction, ANR would maintain about 364.8
acres for permanent operation of the project's pipeline facilities,
with the aboveground facilities operational land impacts to be
determined; the remaining acreage would be restored and revert to
former uses. Portions of the planned pipeline route parallels existing
pipeline, utility, or road rights-of-way, or would be installed within
the same footprint of the existing pipe segment to replaced.

NEPA Process and the Environmental Document

    Any environmental document issued by Commission staff will discuss
impacts that could occur as a result of the construction and operation
of the planned project under the relevant general resource areas:
     Geology and soils;
     Water resources and wetlands;
     Vegetation and wildlife;
     Threatened and endangered species;
     Cultural resources;
     Socioeconomics and environmental justice;
     Land use;
     Air quality and noise; and
     Reliability and safety.
    Community groups, schools, churches, and businesses within these
environmental justice communities, along with known environmental
justice organizations, have been included on the Commission's
environmental mailing list for the project, as further explained in the
Environmental Mailing List section of this notice.
    Commission staff have already identified several issues that
deserve attention based on a preliminary review of the planned
facilities, open house comments, and the environmental information
provided by ANR. This preliminary list of issues may change based on
your comments and our analysis:
     Forested areas;
     Residential development;
     Agricultural land;

     Parkland; and
     Springs and wetlands.
    Commission staff will also evaluate reasonable alternatives to the
planned project or portions of the project and make recommendations on
how to lessen or avoid impacts on the various resource areas. Your
comments will help Commission staff identify and focus on the issues
that might have an effect on the human environment and potentially
eliminate others from further study and discussion in the environmental
document.
    Although no formal application has been filed, Commission staff
have already initiated a NEPA review under the Commission's pre-filing
process. The purpose of the pre-filing process is to encourage early
involvement of interested stakeholders and to identify and resolve
issues before the Commission receives an application. As part of the
pre-filing review, Commission staff will contact federal and state
agencies to discuss their involvement in the scoping process and the
preparation of the environmental document.
    If a formal application is filed, Commission staff will then
determine whether to prepare an Environmental Assessment (EA) or an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The EA or the EIS will present
Commission staff's independent analysis of the environmental issues. If
Commission staff prepares an EA, a Notice of Schedule for the
Preparation of an Environmental Assessment will be issued. The EA may
be issued for an allotted public comment period. The Commission would
consider timely comments on the EA before making its determination on
the proposed project. If Commission staff prepares an EIS, a Notice of
Intent to Prepare an EIS/Notice of Schedule will be issued once an
application is filed, which will open an additional public comment
period. Staff will then prepare a draft EIS that will be issued for
public comment. Commission staff will consider all timely comments
received during the comment period on the draft EIS, and revise the
document, as necessary, before issuing a final EIS. Any EA or draft and
final EIS will be available in electronic format in the public record
through eLibrary \3\ and the Commission's natural gas environmental
documents web page (https://www.ferc.gov/industries-data/natural-gas/environment/environmental-documents). If eSubscribed, you will receive
instant email notification when the environmental document is issued.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ For instructions on connecting to eLibrary, refer to the
last page of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With this notice, the Commission is asking agencies with
jurisdiction by law and/or special expertise with respect to the
environmental issues related to this project to formally cooperate in
the preparation of the environmental document.\4\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Council on Environmental Quality regulations addressing
cooperating agency responsibilities are at Title 40, Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 1501.8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Consultation 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, the Commission is using this notice to initiate
consultation with the applicable State Historic Preservation Office(s),
and to solicit their views and those of other government agencies,
interested Indian tribes, and the public on the project's potential
effects on historic properties.\5\ The environmental document for this
project will document our findings on the impacts on historic
properties and summarize the status of consultations under section 106.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation regulations
are at Title 36, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 800. Those
regulations define historic properties as any prehistoric or
historic district, site, building, structure, or object included in
or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic
Places.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 project and includes a mailing address with their
comments. Commission staff will update the environmental mailing list
as the analysis proceeds to ensure that Commission notices related to
this environmental review are sent to all individuals, organizations,
and government entities interested in and/or potentially affected by
the planned project.
    If you need to make changes to your name/address, or if you would
like to remove your name from the mailing list, please complete one of
the following steps:
    (1) Send an email to [email protected] stating your
request. You must include the docket number PF22-5-000 in your request.
If you are requesting a change to your address, please be sure to
include your name and the correct address. If you are requesting to
delete your address from the mailing list, please include your name and
address as it appeared on this notice. This email address is unable to
accept comments.
    OR
    (2) Return the attached ``Mailing List Update Form'' (appendix 2).

Becoming an Intervenor

    Once ANR files its application with the Commission, you may want to
become an ``intervenor'' which is an official party to the Commission's
proceeding. Only intervenors have the right to seek rehearing of the
Commission's decision 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
pursuant to Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and
Procedures (18 CFR 385.214). Motions to intervene are more fully
described at https://www.ferc.gov/resources/guides/how-to.asp. Please
note that the Commission will not accept requests for intervenor status
at this time. You must wait until the Commission receives a formal
application for the project, after which the Commission will issue a
public notice that establishes an intervention deadline.

Additional Information

    Additional information about the project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC, or on the
FERC website (www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary link. Click on the
eLibrary link, click on ``General Search'' and enter the docket number
in the ``Docket Number'' field (i.e., PF22-5). Be sure you have
selected an appropriate date range. For assistance, please contact FERC
Online Support at [email protected] or toll free at (866) 208-
3676, or for TTY, contact<PHONE_NUMBER>. The eLibrary link also
provides access to the texts of all formal documents issued by the
Commission, such as orders, notices, and rulemakings.

    Public sessions or site visits will be posted on the Commission's
calendar located at https://www.ferc.gov/news-events/events along with
other related information.

    Dated: July 8, 2022.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-15051 Filed 7-13-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


Comment Info: =================

General Comment:Report prepared by Environmental Resources Management for American Premier, Inc (pages 292 through 375). Four large charts were not scanned into the system. To review these documents, please contact the EPA Docket Center or the Air Docket.


[Federal Register: October 6, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 192)]
[Notices]
[Page 51270]
[DOCID:fr06oc09-35]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ID-3274-003]

Egan, Douglas F.; Notice of Filing

September 29, 2009.
    Take notice that on September 22, 2009, Douglas F. Egan filed an
application for authorization to hold interlocking positions, pursuant
to section 305(b) of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 825d and Part 45
of the regulations of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 18 CFR
Part 45.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://
www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible online at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on October 13, 2009.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-23981 Filed 10-5-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 33 (Friday, February 19, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 8391-8392]
[FR Doc No: 2016-03352]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 97

[Docket No. 31061; Amdt. No. 3682]

Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and
Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rule amends, suspends, or removes Standard Instrument
Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and associated Takeoff Minimums and
Obstacle Departure Procedures for operations at certain airports. These
regulatory actions are needed because of the adoption of new or revised
criteria, or because of changes occurring in the National Airspace
System, such as the commissioning of new navigational facilities,
adding new obstacles, or changing air traffic requirements. These
changes are designed to provide for the safe and efficient use of the
navigable airspace and to promote safe flight operations under
instrument flight rules at the affected airports.

DATES: This rule is effective February 19, 2016. The compliance date
for each SIAP, associated Takeoff Minimums, and ODP is specified in the
amendatory provisions.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of February 19, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Availability of matter incorporated by reference in the
amendment is as follows:

For Examination

    1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Ops-M30, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., West Bldg., Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001;
    2. The FAA Air Traffic Organization Service Area in which the
affected airport is located;
    3. The office of Aeronautical Navigation Products, 6500 South
MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 or,
    4. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-
6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

Availability

    All SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs are available online free
of charge. Visit the National Flight Data Center online at nfdc.faa.gov
to register. Additionally, individual SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP
copies may be obtained from the FAA Air Traffic Organization Service
Area in which the affected airport is located.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas J. Nichols, Flight Procedure
Standards Branch (AFS-420) Flight Technologies and Procedures Division,
Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration, Mike
Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma
City, OK 73169 (Mail Address: P.O. Box 25082 Oklahoma City, OK 73125)
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule amends Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97) by amending the referenced SIAPs.
The complete regulatory description of each SIAP is listed on the
appropriate FAA Form 8260, as modified by the National Flight Data
Center (NFDC)/Permanent Notice to Airmen (P-NOTAM), and is incorporated
by reference under 5 U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and 14 CFR 97.20.
The large number of SIAPs, their complex nature, and the need for a
special format make their verbatim publication in the Federal Register
expensive and impractical. Further, airmen do not use the regulatory
text of the SIAPs, but refer to their graphic depiction on charts
printed by publishers of aeronautical materials. Thus, the advantages
of incorporation by reference are realized and publication of the
complete description of each SIAP contained on FAA form documents is
unnecessary. This amendment provides the affected CFR sections, and
specifies the SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs with their applicable
effective dates. This amendment also identifies the airport and its
location, the procedure and the amendment number.

Availability and Summary of Material Incorporated by Reference

    The material incorporated by reference is publicly available as
listed in the ADDRESSES section.
    The material incorporated by reference describes SIAPs, Takeoff
Minimums and ODPs as identified in the amendatory language for part 97
of this final rule.

The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR part 97 is effective upon publication of
each separate SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP as amended in the
transmittal. For safety and timeliness of change considerations, this
amendment incorporates only specific changes contained for each SIAP
and Takeoff Minimums and ODP as modified by FDC permanent NOTAMs.
    The SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, as modified by FDC
permanent NOTAM, and contained in this amendment are based on the
criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for Terminal Instrument
Procedures (TERPS). In developing these changes to SIAPs and Takeoff
Minimums and ODPs, the TERPS criteria were applied only to specific
conditions existing at the affected airports. All SIAP amendments in
this rule have been

previously issued by the FAA in a FDC NOTAM as an emergency action of
immediate flight safety relating directly to published aeronautical
charts.
    The circumstances that created the need for these SIAP and Takeoff
Minimums and ODP amendments require making them effective in less than
30 days.
    Because of the close and immediate relationship between these
SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, and safety in air commerce, I find
that notice and public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are
impracticable and contrary to the public interest and, where
applicable, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d), good cause exists for making these
SIAPs effective in less than 30 days.
    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. For the same reason, the FAA
certifies that this amendment will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 97

    Air Traffic Control, Airports, Incorporation by reference,
Navigation (air).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on January 29, 2016.
John S. Duncan,
Director, Flight Standards Service.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Title 14,
Code of Federal regulations, Part 97, (14 CFR part 97), is amended by
amending Standard Instrument Approach Procedures and Takeoff Minimums
and ODPs, effective at 0901 UTC on the dates specified, as follows:

PART 97--STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES

0
1. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40113, 40114,
40120, 44502, 44514, 44701, 44719, 44721-44722.

Sec. Sec.  97.23, 97.25, 97.27, 97.29, 97.31, 97.33, 97.35  [Amended]

0
2. Part 97 is amended to read as follows:
    By amending: Sec.  97.23 VOR, VOR/DME, VOR or TACAN, and VOR/DME or
TACAN; Sec.  97.25 LOC, LOC/DME, LDA, LDA/DME, SDF, SDF/DME; Sec.
97.27 NDB, NDB/DME; Sec.  97.29 ILS, ILS/DME, MLS, MLS/DME, MLS/RNAV;
Sec.  97.31 RADAR SIAPs; Sec.  97.33 RNAV SIAPs; and Sec.  97.35 COPTER
SIAPs, Identified as follows:

* * * Effective Upon Publication

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Airac Date           State             City                 Airport          FDC No.      FDC Date                      Subject
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3-Mar-16..............  NJ           Vincentown..........  Red Lion............       5/0276      1/19/16  VOR-A, Amdt 6.
3-Mar-16..............  NJ           Vincentown..........  Red Lion............       5/0277     01/19/16  RNAV (GPS) RWY 5, Orig.
3-Mar-16..............  SC           Mount Pleasant......  Mt Pleasant Rgnl-          5/3599     01/13/16  VOR/DME-A, Amdt 1.
                                                            Faison Field.
3-Mar-16..............  SC           Mount Pleasant......  Mt Pleasant Rgnl-          5/3600     01/13/16  RNAV (GPS) RWY 17, Orig-A.
                                                            Faison Field.
3-Mar-16..............  SC           Mount Pleasant......  Mt Pleasant Rgnl-          5/3601     01/13/16  RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, Orig-A.
                                                            Faison Field.
3-Mar-16..............  AL           Gadsden.............  Northeast Alabama          5/4535     01/13/16  RNAV (GPS) RWY 24, Amdt 1A.
                                                            Rgnl.
3-Mar-16..............  NY           Jamestown...........  Chautauqua County/         5/7656     01/13/16  ILS OR LOC RWY 25, Amdt 7A.
                                                            Jamestown.
3-Mar-16..............  SC           Greenwood...........  Greenwood County....       6/1509     01/13/16  VOR OR GPS RWY 9, Amdt 13B.
3-Mar-16..............  ME           Pittsfield..........  Pittsfield Muni.....       6/2519      1/13/16  NDB RWY 36, Amdt 4C.
3-Mar-16..............  ME           Pittsfield..........  Pittsfield Muni.....       6/2520      1/13/16  RNAV (GPS) RWY 36, Orig-B.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2016-03352 Filed 2-18-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 59 (Tuesday, March 28, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 18263-18264]
[FR Doc No: 2023-05941]

========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 59 / Tuesday, March 28, 2023 /
Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2023-0438; Project Identifier 2015-NM-065-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to remove Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2016-
15-01, which applies to all Airbus SAS Model A300 series airplanes;
Model A300 B4-600, B4-600R, and F4-600R series airplanes, and Model
A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes (collectively called Model A300-600
series airplanes); and Model A310 series airplanes. AD 2016-15-01
requires an inspection to determine trimmable horizontal stabilizer
actuator (THSA) part numbers, serial numbers, and flight cycles on
certain THSAs; and repetitive replacement of certain THSAs. AD 2016-15-
01 is no longer necessary, because the FAA has issued AD 2022-25-12 to
terminate AD 2016-15-01 for Model A310 series airplanes and an NPRM
that would terminate AD 2016-15-01 for Model A300-600 series airplanes.
The FAA has also determined that the inclusion of the Model A300 series
airplanes in the applicability of AD 2016-15-01 was an inadvertent
error. Accordingly, the FAA proposes to remove AD 2016-15-01.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by May 12,
2023.

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 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.
    AD Docket: You may examine the AD docket at regulations.gov under
Docket No. FAA-2023-0438; 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, any comments received, and other
information. The street address for Docket Operations is listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, Large
Aircraft Section, FAA, International Validation Branch, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone<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-2023-0438; Project Identifier
2015-NM-065-AD'' 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
regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. The
agency will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal
contact received about this proposed AD.

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 Dan
Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, FAA, International
Validation Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected]. Any commentary that
the FAA receives that is not specifically designated as CBI will be
placed in the public docket for this rulemaking.

Background

    The FAA issued AD 2016-15-01, Amendment 39-18592 (81 FR 47696, July
22, 2016) (AD 2016-15-01), for Airbus SAS Model A300 series airplanes;
Model A300-600 series airplanes; and Model A310 series airplanes. AD
2016-15-01 requires an inspection to determine THSA part numbers,
serial numbers, and flight cycles on certain THSAs; and repetitive
replacement of certain THSAs. AD 2016-15-01 was prompted by reports of
partial loss of no-back brake (NBB) efficiency on the THSA. The FAA
issued AD 2016-15-01 to prevent loss of THSA NBB efficiency, which, in
conjunction with the inability of the power gear to keep the ball screw
in its last commanded position, could lead to an uncommanded movement
of the horizontal stabilizer, possibly resulting in loss of control of
the airplane.

Actions Since AD 2016-15-01 Was Issued

    Since the FAA issued AD 2016-15-01, the European Union Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA) issued AD 2015-0081-CN, dated October 7, 2022, to
cancel EASA AD 2015-0081. EASA AD 2015-0081-CN states that EASA ADs
2022-0194 and 2022-0195, both dated September 23, 2022, require
incorporating new airworthiness tasks, which include the replacement of

certain THSAs, as required by EASA AD 2015-0081 (which corresponds to
FAA AD 2016-15-01).
    The FAA has issued AD 2022-25-12, Amendment 39-22268 (87 FR 78518,
December 22, 2022) (AD 2022-25-12) which addresses the same unsafe
condition for the Airbus SAS Model A310 series airplanes. AD 2022-25-12
requires revising the existing maintenance or inspection program, as
applicable, to incorporate new or more restrictive airworthiness
limitations, as specified in EASA AD 2022-0195.
    The FAA has also issued an NPRM, Docket No. FAA-2022-1660 (88 FR
2035, January 12, 2023) to address the same unsafe condition for the
Airbus SAS Model A300-600 series airplanes. In that NPRM, the FAA
proposed to require revising the existing maintenance or inspection
program, as applicable, to incorporate new or more restrictive
airworthiness limitations, as specified in EASA AD 2022-0194.
    The FAA has also determined that the Airbus SAS Model A300 series
airplanes are not affected by the unsafe condition addressed by AD
2016-15-01. The inclusion of the Model A300 series airplanes in the
applicability of AD 2016-15-01 was an inadvertent error.

FAA's Conclusions

    Upon further consideration, the FAA has determined that AD 2016-15-
01 is no longer necessary. Accordingly, this proposed AD would remove
AD 2016-15-01. Removal of AD 2016-15-01 would not preclude the FAA from
issuing another related action or commit the FAA to any course of
action in the future. This proposed AD would remove all actions of AD
2016-15-01. Therefore, this proposed AD would terminate all
requirements of AD 2016-15-01.

Related Costs of Compliance

    This proposed AD would add no cost. This proposed AD would remove
AD 2016-15-01 from 14 CFR part 39; therefore, operators would no longer
be required to show compliance with that AD.

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.

Regulatory Findings

    The FAA has 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 2016-15-01, Amendment 39-18592 (81
FR 47696, July 22, 2016), and
0
b. Adding the following new airworthiness directive:

Airbus SAS: Docket No. FAA-2023-0438; Project Identifier 2015-NM-
065-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by May 12, 2023.

(b) Affected Airworthiness Directives (ADs)

    This AD replaces AD 2016-15-01, Amendment 39-18592 (81 FR 47696,
July 22, 2016).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the Airbus SAS airplanes identified in
paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(6) of this AD, certificated in any
category, all manufacturer serial numbers.
    (1) Model A300 B2-1A, B2-1C, B2K-3C, B2-203, B4-2C, B4-103, and
B4-203 airplanes.
    (2) Model A300 B4-601, B4-603, B4-620, and B4-622 airplanes.
    (3) Model A300 B4-605R and B4-622R airplanes.
    (4) Model A300 F4-605R and F4-622R airplanes.
    (5) Model A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes.
    (6) Model A310-203, -204, -221, -222, -304, -322, -324, and -325
airplanes.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 27, Flight
controls.

(e) Terminating Action

    This AD terminates all requirements of AD 2016-15-01.

(f) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Dan Rodina,
Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, FAA, International
Validation Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].

(g) Material Incorporated by Reference

    None.

    Issued on March 17, 2023.
Christina Underwood,
Acting Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2023-05941 Filed 3-27-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


  MacroButton macIb01 i

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

EPA Registration Division contact: [Kable Bo Davis (PM-25)<PHONE_NUMBER>]

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

TEMPLATE:

[BASF Corporation]

[Insert petition number]

	EPA has received a pesticide petition ([insert petition number]) from
[BASF Corporation], [26 Davis Drive, P.O. Box 13528, Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina 27709-3528] requesting, pursuant to section 408(d)
of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d),
to amend 40 CFR part 180

(Options (pick one)

	1. by establishing a tolerance for residues of

	[Quinclorac, 3,7-dichloro-8-quinolinecarboxylic acid] in or on the raw
agricultural commodity [canola] at [1.0] parts per million (ppm).  No
tolerances are proposed for the processed commodities, meal and refined
oil, as no concentration of quinclorac residues is expected in these
commodities.  EPA has determined that the petition contains data or
information regarding the elements set forth in section 408 (d)(2) of
FDDCA; however, EPA has not fully evaluated the sufficiency of the
submitted data at this time or whether the data supports granting of the
petition. Additional data may be needed before EPA rules on the
petition.

A. Residue Chemistry

	1. Plant metabolism.

[Plant and livestock metabolism studies previously submitted for
quinclorac are cited in support of this import tolerance petition for
quinclorac on canola.  A nature of the residue in canola included in
this submission is summarized here.

Radiolabeled quinclorac was applied to canola plants 30 days after
sowing at growth stage  ES 15 at a targeted application rate of 0.178 lb
a.i./A (200  g a.i./ha).  The actual application rate was 0.16 lb a.i./A
(181 g a.i./ha), about 1.8 times the maximum seasonal application rate.
Green plants were sampled pre-treatment and at 1 day and 29 days after
treatment (DAT).  Seed and straw were harvested at 60 DAT, consistent
with the proposed 60 day pre-harvest interval. The total radioactive
residue (TRR) in seed was 0.475 mg/kg. The samples were extracted with
acetone:pH 7 phosphate buffer (1:1 v/v) followed by 0.1 N NaOH at
ambient temperature and 0.1 N NaOH at 100°C.  TRR extracted from the
seed and straw was 96% and 88%, respectively.  The non-extractable
residues represented 2.7% and 12.2% of the TRR, respectively.  Based on
analysis of the seed extract by HPLC with radiometric detection, the
main radioactive residues in the seed were quinclorac ((37.1% TRR, 0.176
ppm) and the methyl ester, BH 514-ME (37.1% TRR, 0.176 ppm).  No other
residue >5% TRR was observed.

To remain consistent with the current residue definition for quinclorac
of parent only in the commodities of wheat, rice, sorghum and barley,
the proposed tolerances in canola seed are based on the residues of
parent quinclorac in canola seed. ]

	2. Analytical method. [An adequate analytical method for enforcement of
the tolerances exists. The analytical method used for quantitative
determinations was designed to measure quinclorac residues present as
the parent compound.]

	3. Magnitude of residues. [Magnitude of the Residue - Raw Agricultural
Commodities:  Canola field trials are predominately from Canadian sites
and were conducted using rates and timing intervals to represent the use
patterns, conditions and areas of use for this product in Canada. These
studies should be adequate to establish an import tolerance for canola
seed at the proposed 1.0 ppm level based on parent only.  Results from
19 field trials support the proposal that parent quinclorac can be used
to monitor the safe use of ACCORD Herbicide in canola. The tolerance
proposed was determined using the OECD calculator.

Based on the results of a processing study, residues of quinclorac do
not concentrate in meal or refined oil.

The use in canola does not result in a maximum reasonable feed burden
for cattle, poultry or swine in excess of that already determined for
registered uses.  No additional data were needed in support of residues
in meat, milk, poultry and eggs.]

B. Toxicological Profile

	1. Acute toxicity.  [Based on available acute toxicity data quinclorac
does not pose any acute toxicity risks. Several acute toxicology studies
place technical-grade quinclorac in Toxicity Category III for acute
oral, acute dermal, acute inhalation toxicity, and for eye irritation.
Technical-grade quinclorac is in category IV for primary dermal
irritation and is a skin sensitizer. The soluble liquid end use
formulation of quinclorac (ACCORD SL) that is pending registration in
Canada (registered as Paramount, Facet L, and Drive XLR8 in US) has
tested negative for skin sensitization.]

	2. Genotoxicity. [Quinclorac was tested for its genotoxic potential in
a battery of six in vitro or in vivo studies covering the required
endpoints of point mutations, chromosomal damage and DNA damage and
repair.  Quinclorac did not demonstrate any genotoxic effects.
Quinclorac was negative for inducing mutations in both an in vitro Ames
test and an in vitro forward mutation assay in mammalian cells (HGPRT
test with and without metabolic activation).  Both an in vitro and an in
vivo chromosome aberration assay (with and without metabolic activation)
showed no evidence of a clastogenic effect.  Unscheduled DNA synthesis
was not induced in the UDS assay.  A mutagenicity evaluation with
Bacillus subtilis (with and without metabolic activation) was also
negative. These studies demonstrate that Quinclorac is not genotoxic.]

	3. Reproductive and developmental toxicity. [Teratology - Rats: A
developmental study in rats fed dosages of 0, 24.4, 146, and 438
mg/kg/day (HDT) resulted in a developmental toxicity NOEL of 438
mg/kg/day and a maternal toxicity NOEL of 146 mg/kg/day based on reduced
food consumption, increased water intake, and mortality at 438 mg/kg/day
(HDT).  Under the conditions of this study, quinclorac did not produce
any sign of embryo/fetal toxicity and did not alter fetal morphological
development.

Teratology - Rabbits:  A developmental study in rabbits fed dosages of
0, 70, 200, and 600 mg/kg/day resulted in a developmental toxicity NOEL
of 200 mg/kg/day based on an increase in resorptions and
postimplantation loss; a decrease in the number of live fetuses and
decreased fetal body weights at the 600 mg/kg/day dose level (HDT). At
all other treatment levels no embryo/fetal toxicity was observed. The
maternal toxicity NOEL is 70 mg/kg/day based on decreased body weight
gain and food consumption at 200 mg/kg/day; and increased water
consumption, increased mortality, and discoloration of the kidney at 600
mg/kg/day.

Two-Generation Reproduction - Rats:  [A two-generation reproduction
study was conducted with rats dosed 0, 50, 200, and 600 mg/kg/day.  The
parental toxicity NOAEL is 200 mg/kg/day.  The parental LOAEL is 600
mg/kg/day, based on reduced body weight in both sexes during premating
and lactating periods.   The reproductive toxicity NOAEL is equal to or
greater than 600 mg/kg/day.  The developmental toxicity NOAEL is 200
mg/kg/day.  The developmental toxicity LOAEL is 600 mg/kg/day, based on
decreased pup weight and viability, as well as developmental delays.]

	4. Subchronic toxicity. [A 13-week feeding study in mice was conducted
at doses of 0, 4,000, 8,000, or 16,000 ppm; equivalent to 0, 1,000,
2,202 or 4,555 mg/kg/day for males and 0, 1,467, 2,735 or 5,953
mg/kg/day for females. The lowest observed adverse effect level (LOAEL)
is 1,000 mg/kg/day for males and 1,467 mg/kg/day for females based on
decreased body weight gains in males and females (17.6 and 18.7%,
respectively).

A 13-week feeding study in mice was conducted at doses of 0 and 500 ppm
(equivalent to 0 and 75 mg/kg/ day). The NOAEL is 75 mg/kg/day.

A 3-month feeding study in rats was conducted at doses of 0, 1000, 4000,
or 12000 ppm (0, 76.8, 302.3 or 929.9 mg/kg/day in males and 0, 86.7,
358, or 1,035.4 mg/kg/day in females). The NOAEL is 302 mg/kg/day
(male); 358 mg/kg/day (female). The LOAEL is 930 mg/kg/day (male); 1035
mg/kg/day (female) based on decreased body weight gain, food
consumption, and increased water intake in males and females, increased
SGOT, SGPT and focal chronic interstitial nephritis in males.]

	5. Chronic toxicity. [Chronic Feeding - Nonrodent:  A 1-year feeding
study in dogs fed 0, 34, 142, and 513 (males) and 0, 35, 140, and 469
(females) milligrams/kilogram/day (mg/kg/day) resulted in a
no-observed-effect level (NOEL) of 140 mg/kg/day based on reduced body
weight gains, adverse effect on food efficiency, hematological and
clinical chemistry values, increased liver and kidney weights, and
microscopic findings in liver and kidneys at 513 mg/kg/day (males) and
469 mg/kg/day (females), the highest dosages tested (HDT).

Chronic Feeding/Oncogenicity - Rats:  A chronic feeding/carcinogenicity
study in rats fed dosages of 1, 56, 186, 385, and 487 mg/kg/day (males)
and 0, 60, 235, 478, and 757 mg/kg/day (females) resulted in a NOEL of
385 mg/kg/day (males) and 478 mg/kg/day (females) based on an equivocal
(uncertain) increase in acinar cell hyperplasia of the pancreas in males
at 487 mg/kg/day (HDT) and a slight decreases in weight for females at
757 mg/kg/day (HDT).  No carcinogenic effect was observed in rats.

 Oncogenicity - Mice:  A carcinogenic study in mice fed dosages of 0,
37.5, 150, 600, and 1200 mg/kg/day resulted in no carcinogenic effects
observed under the conditions of the study up to and including 1200
mg/kg/day (HDT) and a systemic NOEL of 37.5 mg/kg/day based on a
reduction of body weight at 150 mg/kg/day.]

	6. Animal metabolism. [A metabolism study with rats receiving dosages
of 15, 100, 600 and 1200 mg/kg/day resulted in more than 90% of the
administered radioactivity eliminated in the urine within 5 days (most
within 24 hours) and 0.7%–3.7% in the feces. Radioactivity was mainly
associated with the unchanged parent compound. The glucuronic acid
conjugate of quinclorac was a minor (2%–5%) metabolite in urine.]

	7. Metabolite toxicology. [Reg. No. 161555 (the methyl ester metabolite
of Quinclorac found in plant) was studied in animal metabolism and
pharmacokinetic studies as well as toxicology studies.

Male bile catherterized Wistar rats  received a single oral dose of 15
or 600 mg/kg bw. About 83% of dosed material was absorbed, rapidly
metabolized and excreted via urine, bile and feces. Less than 1% of the
dosed radioactivity remaining in the carcass after 72 hours.  The the
primary metabolite was found in urine and identified as quinclorac (at
46.71% and 15.34% of the dose for the low and high dose respectively).
The unchanged Reg. No. 16155 was only found in in the feces (0.45% and
12.45% of the dose for the low and high dose respectively).  The
remaining characterized and identified residues were minor, none
amounting to more than 10% of the applied dose.

An acute oral toxicity study was conducted with rats given a single oral
gavage dose of Reg. No. 161555 at a dose level of 2000 mg/kg bw.   With
no resulting mortality, the oral LD50 was found to be greater than 2000
mg/kg bw.

A 90D feeding study was conducted in rats with Reg. No. 161555 at dose
levels of 0, 2000, 4000 and 8000 ppm (equal to 0, 128, 252, and 518
mg/kg bw/d for males and 0, 145, 274 and 509 mg/kg bw/d for females).
Treatment resulted in a no-observed-adverse-effect level (NOAEL) of 2000
ppm for male (128 mg/kg bw/d) and 4000 ppm for female Wistar rats (274
mg/kg bw/d) based upon impaired body weight gain and effects observed in
the liver and thyroid target organs.]

	8. Endocrine disruption. [No specific scientific studies were conducted
to determine endocrine effects.  However, the toxicity testing described
above and conducted on three different animal species demonstrates no
apparent estrogenic effects or treatment-related effects of quinclorac
on the endocrine system.]

C. Aggregate Exposure

	1. Dietary exposure. [A dietary exposure assessment was conducted to
evaluate the potential risk from exposure to quinclorac in food and
drinking water.  The exposure assessment was conducted using all
currently established tolerances and the proposed new import tolerance
for canola. ]

Food. [Acute Dietary Exposure Assessment: The US EPA has determined that
an acute dietary assessment for quinclorac is only required for females
ages 13–49.  The exposure was calculated using tolerance level
residues, 100% crop treatment factors, and default processing factors.
The consumption data was from the USDA Continuing Survey of Food Intake
by Individuals (CSFII 1994–1996, 1998) and the EPA Food Commodity
Ingredient Database (FCID) using Exponent's Dietary Exposure Evaluation
Module (DEEM-FCID) software.

The acute NOAEL is 200 mg/kg bw/day and the FQPA safety factor is 1.
The resulting acute Population Adjusted Dose (aPAD) is 2.0 mg/kg bw/day.
 The results from the acute assessment showed that the food and water
exposure represents less than 1% of the aPAD.

Chronic Dietary Exposure Assessment: The exposure was calculated using
tolerance level residues, 100% crop treatment factors, and default
processing factors.  The consumption data was from the USDA Continuing
Survey of Food Intake by Individuals (CSFII 1994–1996, 1998) and the
EPA Food Commodity Ingredient Database (FCID) using Exponent's Dietary
Exposure Evaluation Module (DEEM-FCID) software.

The chronic NOAEL is 37.5 mg/kg bw/day and the FQPA safety factor is 1.
The resulting chronic Population Adjusted Dose (cPAD) is 0.375 mg/kg
bw/day.  The results from the chronic assessment showed that children
ages 1–2 years old were the most highly exposed sub-population.   The
food and water exposure utilized 3.1% of the cPAD.  Table 1 below shows
the chronic exposure for all sub-populations.

Table 1. Results for Quinclorac (BAS 514 H) Chronic Dietary Exposure
Analysis Considering all Tolerances using DEEM-FCID (food and water)

Population	Exposure Estimate	%cPAD

Subgroups	(mg/kg b.w./day)

U.S. Population	0.0054	1.44

All Infants (< 1 year old)	0.0099	2.65

Children (1-2 years old)	0.0117	3.13

Children (3-5 years old)	0.0100	2.68

Children (6-12 years old)	0.0066	1.75

Youth (13-19 years old)	0.0044	1.16

Adults (20-49 years old)	0.0050	1.32

Adults (50+ years old)	0.0042	1.13

Females (13-49 years old)	0.0043	1.16

]

	ii. Drinking water. [The proposed import tolerances for canola will not
result in water exposure.  The use with the highest estimated drinking
water concentration is a section 18 use on cranberry.  The modeled acute
and chronic surface water concentrations are 77 ug/L and 70 ug/L,
respectively.  These drinking water values were included in the acute
and chronic dietary exposure assessment.  The acute water exposure for
females ages 13–49 utilized 0.19% aPAD.  The chronic water exposure
for the most highly exposed population sub-group, all infants, utilized
1.3% cPAD.]

	2. Non-dietary exposure. [Quinclorac is currently registered for use in
turf.  However, the US EPA has not selected a dermal endpoint for
quinclorac because no dermal toxicity was observed at the limit dose of
1000 mg/kg bw/day in the 21-day dermal toxicity study.  Therefore, a
dermal exposure assessment is not required.  For the turf use, an oral
exposure from hand-to-mouth and object-to-mouth for toddlers is
required.  The oral short- and intermediate-term NOAEL is 70 mg/kg
bw/day.  The toddler oral exposure and resulting MOE values from the use
of quinclorac on turf is shown in Table 2 below.

Table 2.  Residential Exposure and Risk Estimates for Post-Application
Incidental Oral Exposure of Toddlers to Quinclorac on Turf.

Acute Aggregate Exposure (Food and Drinking Water)

The aggregate acute risk includes residues of quinclorac from food and
water. Exposures from residential uses are not included in the acute
aggregate assessment.  The results demonstrate that there are no safety
concerns for any subpopulation based on established and new uses, and
that the results clearly meet the FQPA standard of reasonable certainty
of no harm.

Short- and Intermediate-Term Aggregate Exposure and Risk (food, water,
and residential)

Short-term aggregate risk from quinclorac takes into account exposures
from dietary consumption (food and water) and residential exposure from
turf use.  Short- and intermediate-term aggregate risk assessment is not
required for adults because there is no dermal exposure assessment
required.  The aggregate MOE from food, water, and residential oral
exposure for children 1–2 years old is 2700.  This MOE is greater than
the target MOE of 100 which indicates there is no safety concern.

Chronic Aggregate Exposure and Risk (food and water)

The aggregate chronic risk includes residues of quinclorac from food and
water. Exposures from residential uses are not included in the chronic
aggregate assessment.  The results demonstrate there are no safety
concerns for any subpopulation based on established and new uses, and
that the results clearly meet the FQPA standard of reasonable certainty
of no harm.]

D. Cumulative Effects

	[BASF is not aware of any other EPA registered active ingredient that
is structurally similar to quinclorac or has a common mechanism of
toxicity.]

E. Safety Determination

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

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

F. International Tolerances

	[There are no CODEX or Mexican maximum residue limits established for
quinclorac on canola.]

 PAGE

 PAGE   5


[Federal Register: November 5, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 213)]
[Notices]
[Page 57312-57313]
[DOCID:fr05no09-51]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2009-0718; FRL-8792-6]

National Advisory Committee for Acute Exposure Guideline Levels
for Hazardous Substances; Notice of Charter Renewal

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that EPA has determined that, in
accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act
(FACA), 5 U.S.C. Appendix, the National Advisory Committee for Acute
Exposure Guideline Levels for Hazardous Substances (NAC/AEGL Committee)
is a necessary committee which is in the public interest. Accordingly,
the NAC/AEGL Committee will be renewed for an additional 2-year period.
The purpose of the NAC/AEGL Committee is to provide advice and
recommendations to the EPA Administrator on issues associated with
acute exposure guideline levels which can be used by Federal, State,
and local agencies and the private sector for emergency planning
response and prevention activities related to release of hazardous
substances through accident or chemical terrorism activity. The NAC/
AEGL Committee's recommended values will represent standardized
national acute exposure guideline levels developed by a cross-section
of the U.S. scientific community and based on the use of consistent
methodology developed by the National Academy of Sciences.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information contact: Colby
Lintner, Regulatory Coordinator, Environmental Assistance Division
(7408M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address: TSCA-
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     For technical information contact: Paul S. Tobin, Designated
Federal Officer (DFO), Risk Assessment Division (7403M), Office of
Pollution Prevention and Toxics, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
address: tobin.paul @epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    This action is directed to the public in general. This action may
be of particular interest to anyone who may be affected if AEGL values
are adopted by government agencies for emergency planning, prevention,
or response programs, such as EPA's Risk Management Program under the
Clean Air Act and Amendments Section 112r. It is possible that other
Federal agencies besides EPA, as well as State agencies and private
organizations may adopt AEGL values for their programs. As such, 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
technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

II. How Can I Get Copies of this Document and Other Related
Information?

     EPA has established a docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2009-0718. 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., Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain
other material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly
available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are
available electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only
available in hard copy, at the OPPT Docket. The OPPT Docket is located
in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC) at Rm. 3334, EPA West Bldg., 1301
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room
hours of operation are 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The telephone number of the EPA/DC Public
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the OPPT
Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Docket visitors are required to show
photographic identification, pass through a metal detector, and sign
the EPA visitor log. All visitor bags are processed through an X-ray
machine and subject to search. Visitors will be provided an EPA/DC
badge that must be visible at all times in the building and returned
upon departure.

List of Subjects

     Environmental protection, Acute exposure guideline levels,
Administrative practice and procedure, Hazardous substances, Health and
safety.

    Dated: October 28, 2009.
Stephen A. Owens,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic
Substances.
[FR Doc. E9-26704 Filed 11-4-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


MEMORANDUM

DATE:   August 6, 2010

FROM:  Keith Barnett, EPA/OAR/OAQPS/SPPD/MMG

TO: Portland Cement Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0051

SUBJECT:   Incorporation by reference of Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0877,
Standards of Performance for Portland Cement Plants

Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0877 contains information that is relevant to the
Portland Cement NESHAP rulemaking and Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0877 is
incorporated by reference into this docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0051.