<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">

<META name="generator" content="United States">
<META name="creation-date" content="14/10/2009 04:25:20 ">
<TITLE>United States</TITLE>

United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Prevention, Pesticides
and Toxic Substances
(7101)
EPA 740-C-09-002
October 2009
Endocrine Disruptor
Screening Program
Test Guidelines
OPPTS 890.1100:
Amphibian
Metamorphosis (Frog)
Page 1

NOTICE
This guideline is one of a series of test guidelines established by the Office of
Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances (OPPTS), United States Environmental Protection
Agency for use in testing pesticides and chemical substances to develop data for submission to
the Agency under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) (15 U.S.C. 2601, et seq.), the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) (7 U.S.C. 136, et seq.), and section
408 of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic (FFDCA) (21 U.S.C. 346a).
The OPPTS test guidelines serve as a compendium of accepted scientific
methodologies and protocols that are intended to provide data to inform regulatory decisions
under TSCA, FIFRA, and/or FFDCA.  This document provides guidance for conducting the test,
and is also used by EPA, the public, and the companies that are subject to data submission
requirements under TSCA, FIFRA and/or the FFDCA.  As a guidance document, these
guidelines are not binding on either EPA or any outside parties, and the EPA may depart from
the guidelines where circumstances warrant and without prior notice.  The procedures contained
in this guideline are strongly recommended for generating the data that are the subject of the
guideline, but EPA recognizes that departures may be appropriate in specific situations. You
may propose alternatives to the recommendations described in these guidelines, and the
Agency will assess them for appropriateness on a case-by-case basis.
For additional information about OPPTS harmonized test guidelines and to access the
guidelines electronically, please go to http://www.epa.gov/oppts and select “Test Methods &
Guidelines” on the left side navigation menu.  You may also access the guidelines in
http://www.regulations.gov grouped by Series under Docket ID #s: EPA-HQ-OPPT-2009-0150
through EPA-HQ-OPPT-2009-0159, and EPA-HQ-OPPT-2009-0576.

OPPTS 890.1100:  Amphibian Metamorphosis (Frog).
(a)
Scope.
(1)
Applicability. This guideline is intended to meet testing requirements of
the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) (15 U.S.C. 2601, et seq.), the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) (7 U.S.C.
136, et seq.), and the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) (21
U.S.C. 346a).
(2)
Background. The Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP)
reflects a two-tiered approach to implement the statutory testing
requirements of FFDCA section 408(p) (21 U.S.C. 346a).  In general, EPA
intends to use the data collected under the EDSP, along with other
information, to determine if a pesticide chemical, or other substances, may
pose a risk to human health or the environment due to disruption of the
endocrine system.
This test guideline is intended to be used in conjunction with other
guidelines in the OPPTS 890 series that make up the full screening
battery under the EDSP to identify substances that have the potential to
interact with the estrogen, androgen, or thyroid hormone (Tier 1
“screening”).  The determination will be made on a weight-of-evidence
basis taking into account data from the Tier 1 assays and other
scientifically relevant information available.  The fact that a substance may
interact with a hormone system, however, does not mean that when the
substance is used, it will cause adverse effects in humans or ecological
systems.
Chemicals that go through Tier 1 screening and are found to have the
potential to interact with the estrogen, androgen, or thyroid hormone
systems will proceed to the next stage of the EDSP where EPA will
determine which, if any, of the Tier 2 tests are necessary based on the
available data.  Tier 2 testing is designed to identify any adverse
endocrine-related effects caused by the substance, and establish a
quantitative relationship between the dose and that endocrine effect.
(3)
Source. OPPTS developed this guideline through a process of
harmonization with Test Guideline 231 published by the Organization for
Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) (Ref. 1).
(b)
Purpose. The Amphibian Metamorphosis Assay (AMA) is a screening assay
intended to empirically identify substances which may interfere with the normal
function of the hypothalamic-pituitary-thyroid (HPT) axis.  The AMA represents a
generalized vertebrate model to the extent that it is based on the conserved
structures and functions of the HPT axis.  It is an important assay because
amphibian metamorphosis provides a well-studied, thyroid-dependent process
Page 3

which responds to substances active within the HPT axis, and it is the only
existing assay that detects thyroid activity in an animal undergoing morphological
development.
(c)
Introduction. The need to develop and validate an assay capable of detecting
substances active in the thyroid system of vertebrate species originates from
concerns that environmental levels of chemicals may cause adverse effects in
both humans and wildlife.  The Amphibian Metamorphosis Assay (AMA)
underwent an extensive validation program which included intra- and inter-
laboratory studies demonstrating the relevance and reliability of the assay (Ref.
2, Ref. 3).  Subsequently, the validation of the assay was subject to peer-review
by a panel of independent experts (Ref. 4).  This Test guideline is the outcome of
the experience gained during the validation studies for the detection of thyroid
active substances
(d)
General Experimental Design. The general experimental design entails
exposing stage 51 Xenopus laevis tadpoles to a minimum of three different
concentrations of a test chemical and a dilution water control (and solvent
control, if necessary) for 21 days.  There are four replicates for each test
treatment.  Larval density at test initiation is 20 tadpoles per test tank for all
treatment groups.  The observational endpoints are hind limb length, snout to
vent length (SVL), developmental stage, wet weight, thyroid histology, and daily
observations of mortality.
(e)
Description of the Method
(1)
Test Species.  Xenopus laevis is routinely cultured in laboratories
worldwide and is easily obtainable through commercial suppliers.
Reproduction can be easily induced in this species throughout the year
using human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) injections and the resultant
larvae can be routinely reared to selected developmental stages in large
numbers to permit the use of stage-specific test protocols.  It is preferred
that larvae used in the assay are derived from in-house adults.  As an
alternative although this is not the preferred procedure, eggs or embryos
may be shipped to the laboratory performing the test and allowed to
acclimate; the shipping of larval stages for use in the test is unacceptable.
(2)
Equipment and Supplies. The following equipment and supplies are
needed for the conduct of this assay:
(i)
Exposure system (see description below);
(ii)
Glass or stainless steel aquaria (see description below);
(iii) Breeding tanks
(iv)
Temperature controlling apparatus (e.g., heaters or coolers
(adjustable to 22° ± 1°C));
(v) Thermometer;
(vi)
Binocular dissection microscope;
Page 4

(vii)
Digital camera with at least 4 megapixel resolution and micro
function;
(ix)
Image digitizing software;
(x)
Petri dish (e.g. 100 x 15 mm) or transparent plastic chamber of
comparable size;
(xi)
Analytical balance capable of measuring to 3 decimal places (mg);
(xii)
Dissolved oxygen meter;
(xiii) pH meter;
(xiv)
Light intensity meter capable of measuring in lux units;
(xv) Miscellaneous laboratory glassware and tools;
(xvi)
Adjustable pipetters (10 to 5,000 μL) or assorted pipettes of
equivalent sizes;
(xvii)
Test chemical in sufficient quantities to conduct the study,
preferably of one lot #; and
(xviii)  Analytical instrumentation appropriate for the chemical on test or
contracted analytical services.
(3)
Chemical Testability. The AMA is based upon an aqueous exposure
protocol whereby test chemical is introduced into the test chambers via a
flow-through system.  Flow-through methods however, introduce
constraints on the types of chemicals that can be tested, as determined by
the physicochemical properties of the compound.  Therefore, prior to using
this protocol, baseline information about the chemical should be obtained
that is relevant to determining the testability, and the OECD Guidance
Document on Aquatic Toxicity Testing of Difficult Substances and Mixtures
should be consulted (Ref. 5).  Characteristics which indicate that the
chemical may be difficult to test in aquatic systems include: high octanol
water partitioning coefficients (log K
ow
), high volatility, susceptibility to
hydrolysis, and susceptibility to photolysis under ambient laboratory
lighting conditions.  Other factors may also be relevant to determining
testability and should be determined on a case by case basis.  If a
successful test is not possible for the chemical using a flow-through test
system, a static renewal system may be employed.  If neither system is
capable of accommodating the test chemical, then the default is to not test
it using this protocol.
(4)
Exposure System.  A flow-through diluter system is preferred, when
possible, over a static renewal system.  If physical and/or chemical
properties of any of the test substances are not amenable to a flow-
through diluter system, then an alternative exposure system (e.g., static-
renewal) can be employed.
The system components should have water-contact components of glass,
stainless steel, and/or Teflon®.  However, suitable plastics can be utilized
if they do not compromise the study.  Exposure tanks should be glass or
stainless steel aquaria, equipped with standpipes that result in an
approximate tank volume between 4.0 and 10.0 L and minimum water
Page 5

depth of 10 to 15 cm.  The system should be capable of supporting all
exposure concentrations and a control, with four replicates per treatment.
The flow rate to each tank should be held constant in consideration of both
the maintenance of biological conditions and chemical exposure (e.g.  25
mL/min).  The treatment tanks should be randomly assigned to a position
in the exposure system in order to reduce potential positional effects,
including slight variations in temperature, light intensity, etc.
Fluorescent lighting should be used to provide a photoperiod of 12 hr light:
12 hr dark at an intensity that ranges from 600 to 2,000 lux (lumens/m ) at
2
the water surface.
Water temperature should be maintained at 22° ± 1°C, pH maintained
between 6.5 to 8.5, and the dissolved oxygen (DO) concentration > 3.5
mg/L (> 40% of the air saturation) in each test tank.  As a minimum water
temperature, pH and dissolved oxygen should be measured weekly;
temperature should preferably be measured continuously in at least one
test vessel. Total hardness and alkalinity should be measured in the
control vessels and one vessel at the highest concentration at least once
per week.
Appendix 1 outlines the experimental conditions under which the protocol
should be executed.  For further information on setting up flow-through
exposure systems and/or static renewal systems, please refer to the
ASTM Standard Guide for Conducting Acute Toxicity Tests on Test
Materials with Fishes, Macroinvertebrates, and Amphibians (Ref. 6) and
general aquatic toxicology texts.
(i)
Water quality. Any water that is locally available (e.g. springwater
or charcoal-filtered tap water) and permits normal growth and
development of X. laevis tadpoles could be used. Because local
water quality can differ substantially from one area to another,
analysis of water quality should be undertaken, particularly, if
historical data on the utility of the water for raising Xenopus is not
available.  Special attention should be given that the water is free of
copper, chlorine and chloramines, all of which are toxic to frogs and
tadpoles. It is further recommended to analyze the water
concerning background levels of fluoride, perchlorate and chlorate
(by-product of drinking water disinfection) as all of these anions are
substrates of the iodine transporter of the thyroid gland and
elevated levels of each of these anions may confound the study
outcome. Analysis should be performed before testing begins and
the testing water should normally be free from these anions.
(ii)
Iodide Concentration in Test Water. In order for the thyroid gland
to synthesize TH, sufficient iodide needs to be available to the
larvae through a combination of aqueous and dietary sources.
Page 6

Currently, there are no empirically derived guidelines for minimal
iodide concentrations.  However, iodide availability may affect the
responsiveness of the thyroid system to thyroid active agents and is
known to modulate the basal activity of the thyroid gland, an aspect
that deserves attention when interpreting the results from thyroid
histopathology.  Likewise, excessive iodide concentrations could
potentially mask the effects of thyroid active substances.
Therefore, measured aqueous iodide concentrations from the test
water should be reported.  Based on the available data from the
validation studies, the protocol has been demonstrated to work well
when test water iodide (I ) concentrations ranged between 0.5 and
-
10µg/L.  Ideally, the minimum iodide concentration in the test water
should be 0.5μg/L.  If the test water is reconstituted from deionized
water, iodine must be added at a minimum concentration of
0.5μg/L.  Iodide supplementation is only needed if the concentration
is naturally below 0.5 μg/L in the test water; then, the iodide
supplementation should not exceed 2 μg/L.  Any supplementation
of the test water with iodine or other salts must be noted in the
report.
(5)
Holding of Animals.
(i)
Adult Care and Breeding. Adult care and breeding is conducted
in accordance with standard guidelines (Ref. 7) and the reader is
directed to the standard guide for performing FETAX for more
detailed information.  Such standard guidelines provide an example
of appropriate care and breeding methods, but strict adherence is
not required.  To induce breeding, pairs (3-5) of adult females and
males are injected with human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG).
Female and male specimens are injected with approximately 800
IU-1000 IU and 600 IU-800 IU, respectively, of hCG dissolved in
0.6-0.9% saline solution.  Breeding pairs are held in large tanks,
undisturbed and under static conditions to promote amplexus.  The
bottom of each breeding tank should have a false bottom of
stainless steel or plastic mesh which permits the egg masses to fall
to the bottom of the tank.  Frogs injected in the late afternoon will
usually deposit most of their eggs by mid morning of the next day.
After a sufficient quantity of eggs are released and fertilized, adults
should be removed from the breeding tanks.
(ii)
Larval Care and Selection.  After the adults are removed from the
breeding tanks, the eggs are collected and evaluated for viability
using a representative sub-set of the embryos from all breeding
tanks.  The best individual spawn(s) (2-3 recommended to evaluate
the quality of the spawns) should be retained based upon embryo
viability and the presence of an adequate number (minimum of
1500) of embryos.  All the organisms used in a study must originate
Page 7

from a single spawning event (i.e., the spawns should not be co-
mixed).
The embryos are transferred into a large flat pan or dish and all
obvious dead or abnormal eggs (see definition in (Ref. 6)) are
removed using a pipette or eyedropper.  The sound embryos from
each of the three spawns are transferred into three separate
hatching tanks.
Four days after being placed in the hatching tanks, the best spawn,
based on viability and hatching success, is selected and the larvae
are transferred into an appropriate number of rearing tanks at 22°
±1°C.  In addition, some additional larvae are moved into extra
tanks for use as replacements in the event that mortalities occur in
the rearing tanks during the first week.  This procedure maintains
consistent organism density and thereby reduces developmental
divergence within the cohort of a single spawn.
All rearing tanks should be siphoned clean daily. As a precaution,
vinyl or nitrile gloves are preferred to latex gloves.  Mortalities
should be removed daily and replacement larvae should be added
back to maintain the organism density during the first week.
Feeding must occur at least twice per day.
During the pre-exposure phase, tadpoles are acclimated to the
conditions of the actual exposure phase including; the type of food,
temperature, light-dark cycle, and the culture medium.  Therefore, it
is recommended that the same culture/dilution water be used
during the pre-exposure phase and the exposure phase.  If a static
culture system is used for maintaining tadpoles during the pre-
exposure phase, the culture medium should be replaced completely
at least twice per week.
Crowding, caused by high larval densities during the pre-exposure
period, should be avoided because such effects could markedly
affect tadpole development during the subsequent testing phase.
Therefore, the rearing density should not exceed approximately
four tadpoles/L culture medium (static exposure system) or 10
tadpoles/L culture medium (with e.g. 50 mL/min flow rate in the pre-
exposure or culturing system).  Under these conditions, tadpoles
should develop from stages 45/46 to stage 51 within twelve days.
Representative tadpoles of this stock population should be
inspected daily for developmental stage in order to estimate the
appropriate time point for initiation of exposure.  Care should be
used to minimize stress and trauma to the tadpoles, especially
during movement, cleaning of aquaria, and manipulation of larvae.
Page 8

Stressful conditions/activities should be avoided such as loud
and/or incessant noise, tapping on aquaria, vibrations in the
aquaria, excessive activity in the laboratory, and rapid changes in
environmental media (light availability, temperature, pH, DO, water
flow rates, etc.)  If tadpoles do not develop to stage 51 within 17
days after fertilization, excessive stress should be considered as a
potential culprit.
(iii)
Larval Culture and Feeding. Tadpoles are fed with Sera Micron®
(Sera GmbH, Heinsberg, Germany) throughout the pre-exposure
period (after NF stage 45/46) and during the entire test period of 21
days, or other diet that has demonstrated to allow equal
performance of tadpoles within the AMA when using Sera Micron®.
The feeding regime during the pre-exposure period should be
carefully adjusted to meet the demands of the developing tadpoles.
That is, small portions of food should be provided to the newly
hatched tadpoles several times per day (at least twice).  Excess
food should be avoided i) to maintain water quality and ii) to prevent
the clogging of gill filters with food particles and detritus.
For Sera Micron®, the daily food rations should be increased along
with tadpole growth to approximately 30 mg/animal/day shortly
before test initiation.  Sera Micron®, a commercially available
tadpole food that has been shown in the validation studies to
support proper growth and development of X. laevis tadpoles, is a
fine particulate that stays suspended in the water column for a long
period of time and is subject to washing out with the flow.
Therefore, the total daily amount of food should be divided into
smaller portions and fed at least twice daily.
For Sera Micron®, the feeding regime is outlined in Table 1.
Feeding rates must be recorded.  Sera Micron® can be fed dry or
as a stock solution prepared in dilution water.  Such a stock
solution should be freshly prepared every other day and stored at
4°C when not in use.
Table 1. Feeding Regime for X. laevis Tadpoles During the In-life Portion of the AMA in
Flow-through Conditions.
Study Day
Food ration (mg Sera Micron/animal/day)
0-4 30
5-7 40
8-10 50
11-14 70
15-21 80
Page 9

(6)
Analytical Chemistry. Prior to conducting a study, the stability of the test
compound should be evaluated using existing information on its solubility,
degradability, and volatility.  Test solutions from each replicate tank at
each concentration should be sampled for analytical chemistry analyses at
test initiation (day 0), and weekly during the test for a minimum of four
samples.  It is recommended that each test concentration be analyzed
during system preparation, prior to test initiation, to verify system
performance.  In addition, it is recommended that stock solutions be
analyzed when they are changed, especially if the volume of the stock
solution does not provide adequate amounts of chemical to span the
duration of routine sampling periods.  In the case of chemicals which
cannot be detected at some or all of the concentrations used in a test,
stock solutions should be measured and system flow rates recorded to
calculate actual concentrations.
(7)
Chemical Delivery. The method used to introduce the test chemical to
the system can vary depending on its physicochemical properties. Water
soluble compounds can be dissolved in aliquots of test water at a
concentration which allows delivery at the target test concentration in a
flow-through system.  Chemicals which are liquid at room temperature and
sparingly soluble in water can be introduced using liquid:liquid saturator
methods. (Ref. 8)  Chemicals which are solid at room temperature and are
sparingly soluble in water can be introduced using glass wool column
saturators (Ref. 8).
The preference is to use a carrier-free test system, however different test
chemicals will possess varied physicochemical properties that will likely
require different approaches for preparation of chemical exposure water.
It is preferred that effort be made to avoid solvents or carriers because: i)
certain solvents themselves may result in toxicity and/or undesirable or
unexpected endocrinological responses, ii) testing chemicals above their
water solubility (as can frequently occur through the use of solvents) can
result in inaccurate determinations of effective concentrations, and iii) the
use of solvents in longer-term tests can result in a significant degree of
“biofilming” associated with microbial activity.
For difficult to test substances, a solvent may be employed as a last
resort, and the OECD Guidance Document on aquatic toxicity testing of
difficult substances and mixtures should be consulted (Ref. 5) to
determine the best method.  The choice of solvent will be determined by
the chemical properties of the substance.  Solvents which have been
found to be effective for aquatic toxicity testing include acetone, ethanol,
methanol, dimethyl formamide and triethylene glycol.
In case a solvent carrier is used, solvent concentrations should be below
the chronic No Observed Effect Concentration (NOEC); the OECD
Guidance Document recommends a maximum of 100µl/L; a recent review
Page 10

recommends that solvent concentrations as low as 20µl/L of dilution water
be used (Ref. 13).  If solvent carriers are used, appropriate solvent
controls (clean water) must be evaluated in addition to non-solvent
controls.  If it is not possible to administer a chemical via the water, either
because of physicochemical characteristics (low solubility) or limited
chemical availability, introducing it via the diet may be considered.
Preliminary work has been conducted on dietary exposures; however, this
route of exposure is not commonly used. The choice of method should be
documented and analytically verified.
(8)
Selection of Test Concentrations
(i)
Establishing the High Test Concentration. For the purposes of
this test, the high test concentration should be set by the solubility
limit of the test substance; the maximum tolerated concentration
(MTC) for acutely toxic chemicals; or 100 mg/L, whichever is
lowest.
The MTC is defined as the highest test concentration of the
chemical which results in less than 10% acute mortality.  Using this


[Federal Register: December 18, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 242)]
[Notices]
[Page 67204-67205]
[DOCID:fr18de09-58]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER10-397-000]

Cesarie, Inc.; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate
Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

December 10, 2009.

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Cesarie, Inc.'s application for market-based rate authority, with an
accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a
request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR Part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a
copy of that document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR Part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is December 30, 2009.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://
www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling

link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-30068 Filed 12-17-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 86 (Thursday, May 3, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 19472-19474]
[FR Doc No: 2018-09092]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2017-0866; Airspace Docket No. 17-ASO-20]
RIN 2120-AA66

Proposed Amendment of Class D Airspace, Removal of Class E
Airspace, and Establishment of Class E Airspace; Olive Branch, MS

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend Class D airspace, remove Class E
airspace designated as an extension, and establish Class E airspace
extending upward from 700 feet or more above the surface at Olive
Branch Airport, Olive Branch, MS. The Olive Branch non-directional
radio beacon (NDB) has been decommissioned, requiring the redesign of
the airspace. This proposal would replace the outdated term Airport/
Facility Directory with the term Chart Supplement in the Class D legal
description.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 18, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West
Bldg., Ground Floor, Rm W12-140, Washington, DC 20590; telephone: 202-
366-9826. You must identify the Docket No. FAA-2017-0866; Airspace
Docket No. 17-ASO-20, at the beginning of your comments. You may also
submit and review received comments through the internet at http://www.regulations.gov. You may review the public docket containing the
proposal, any comments received, and any final disposition in person in
the Dockets Office between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
    FAA Order 7400.11B, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and
subsequent amendments can be viewed on line at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the
Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
The Order is also available for inspection at the National Archives and
Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of
FAA

Order 7400.11B at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal-regulations/ibr_locations.html.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  John Fornito, Operations Support
Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, 1700
Columbia Avenue, College Park, GA 30337; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it would amend Class D airspace, remove Class E airspace, and
establish Class E airspace at Olive Branch Airport, Olive Branch, MS,
to support IFR operations at the airport.

Comments Invited

    Interested persons are invited to comment on this rule by
submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as they may desire.
Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the views and
suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing reasoned
regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are specifically invited
on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and
energy-related aspects of the proposal.
    Communications should identify both docket numbers and be submitted
in triplicate to the address listed above. You may also submit comments
through the internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Persons wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on
this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed stamped
postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket
No. FAA-2017-0866; Airspace Docket No. 17-ASO-20.'' The postcard will
be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received before the specified closing date for
comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule.
The proposal contained in this notice may be changed in light of the
comments received. A report summarizing each substantive public contact
with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded from and
comments submitted through http://www.regulations.gov. Recently
published rulemaking documents can also be accessed through the FAA's
web page at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see the ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between
9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
Holidays. An informal docket may also be examined between 8:00 a.m. and
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays at the office
of the Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, Room
350, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, Georgia 30337.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document proposes to amend FAA Order 7400.11B, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2017, and effective
September 15, 2017. FAA Order 7400.11B is publicly available as listed
in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11B lists
Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Proposal

    The FAA is considering an amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 by amending Class D airspace to a 4.1-mile
radius, (from a 4-mile radius) at Olive Branch Airport, Olive Branch,
MS, and removing Class E airspace designated as an extension to Class
D, due to the decommissioning of the Olive Branch NDB and cancellation
of the NDB approach. Also, this action proposes to establish Class E
airspace extending upward from 700 feet or more above the surface at
Olive Branch Airport, Olive Branch, MS, (this airspace was removed from
the Memphis, TN, airspace in a separate rulemaking.
    Additionally, this action would make an editorial change to the
Class D airspace legal description replacing Airport/Facility Directory
with the term Chart Supplement.
    Class D and Class E airspace designations are published in
paragraph 5000, 6004, and 6005, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.11B,
dated August 3, 2017, and effective September 15, 2017, which is
incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class D and E airspace
designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in
the Order.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

Environmental Review

    This proposal would be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies
and Procedures'' prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation
Administration Order 7400.11B, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, dated August 3, 2017, effective September 15, 2017, is amended
as follows:

Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace.

* * * * *

ASO MS D Olive Branch, MS [Amended]

Olive Branch Airport, MS
    (Lat. 34[deg]58'44'' N, long. 89[deg]47'13'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including
2,900 feet MSL within a 4.1-mile radius of Olive Branch Airport.
This Class D airspace area is effective during the specific days and
times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective
days and times will thereafter be continuously published in the
Chart Supplement.

Paragraph 6004 Class E Airspace Designated as an Extension to a
Class D Surface Area.

* * * * *

ASO MS E4 Olive Branch, MS [Removed]

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

* * * * *

ASO MS E5 Olive Branch, MS [New]

Olive Branch Airport, MS
    (Lat. 34[deg]58'44'' N, long. 89[deg]47'13'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.6-mile radius of Olive Branch Airport.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on April 24, 2018.
Geoff Lelliott,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air
Traffic Organization.
[FR Doc. 2018-09092 Filed 5-2-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 162 (Wednesday, August 21, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 51696]
[FR Doc No: 2013-20409]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 770

[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2011-0380; FRL-9397-3]
RIN 2070-AJ44

Formaldehyde; Third-Party Certification Framework for the
Formaldehyde Standards for Composite Wood Products; Extension of
Comment Period

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: EPA issued a proposed rule in the Federal Register of June 10,
2013, concerning a third-party certification framework for the
formaldehyde standards for composite wood products. After receiving
requests for an extension, EPA extended the comment period from August
9, 2013, to August 26, 2013. EPA received additional comments and
believes it is appropriate to further extend the comment period in
order to give stakeholders additional time to assess the impacts of the
proposal, review technical documents in the docket, and prepare
comments. This document extends the comment period from August 26,
2013, to September 25, 2013.

DATES: Comments, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-
HQ-OPPT-2011-0380, must be received on or before September 25, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Follow the detailed instructions as provided under ADDRESSES
in the Federal Register document of June 10, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical information contact:
Erik Winchester, National Program Chemicals Division, Office of
Pollution Prevention and Toxics (7404T), Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001;
telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For general information contact: The TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill,
422 South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 14620; telephone number: (202)
554-1404; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This document extends the public comment
period established in the Federal Register of July 23, 2013 (78 FR
44090) (FRL-9393-9). EPA is hereby extending the comment period, which
was set to end on August 26, 2013, to September 25, 2013.
    To submit comments, or access the docket, please follow the
detailed instructions as provided under ADDRESSES in the June 10, 2013,
Federal Register document (78 FR 34796) (FRL-9342-4). If you have
questions, consult the technical person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 770

    Environmental protection, Composite wood products, Formaldehyde,
Reporting and recordkeeping, Third-party certification.

    Dated: August 15, 2013.
Louise P. Wise,
Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution
Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2013-20409 Filed 8-20-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 104 (Friday, May 30, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31176-31177]
[FR Doc No: 2014-12568]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Twentieth Meeting: RTCA Special Committee 217--Aeronautical
Databases Joint with EUROCAE WG-44--Aeronautical Databases

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

ACTION: Notice of RTCA Special Committee 217--Aeronautical Databases
Joint with EUROCAE WG-44--Aeronautical Databases.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of a
meeting of RTCA Special Committee 217--Aeronautical Databases being
held jointly with EUROCAE WG-44--Aeronautical Databases.

DATES: The meeting will be held June 16-20, 2014 from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00
p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be hosted by FedEx, FedEx Corporate HQ, 942
Shady Grove Rd., Memphis, TN.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sophie Bousquet<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
202-330-0663 or The RTCA Secretariat, 1150 18th Street NW., Suite 910,
Washington, DC 20036, or by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax at (202)
833-9434, or Web site at http://www.rtca.org.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., App.), notice is
hereby given for a meeting of RTCA Special Committee 217--Aeronautical
Databases held jointly with EUROCAE WG-44--Aeronautical Databases. The
agenda will include the following:

Monday, June 16 2014, Opening Plenary

 Co-Chairmen's remarks and introductions
 Approve minutes from 19th meeting
 Review and approve meeting agenda for 20th meeting
 Schedule and working arrangements for this week
 Review of joint WG-1/WG-2 Action Items

 Continuation, ``Data Terms Definitions'' Review

Monday Thru Thursday, June 16-19--Working Group One (WG1)--DO-200A/ED-
76--Stephane Dubet

 Review of WG-1 Action Items Status
 B. Document Editor, Status and Review
 C. Discussion and progress on ED-76/DO-200A update
 D. Process to develop a first mature draft update to ED76/
DO200A

Working Group Two (WG2)--DO-272/DO-276/DO 291--John Kasten

 WG-2 Action Item Status Review
 CEN TC 377 Update (if available)
 Sub-Group Status Reports (Content, Connectivity, Consistency,
etc)
 Document Editor, Status and Review
 Review of Working Papers, Discussion Papers, Information
Papers, others

Friday Morning, June 20 2014, Closing Plenary Session (9:00 a.m. to
Noon)

 Presentation of WG1 and WG2 conclusions
 Working arrangements for the remaining work
 Review of action items
 Next meetings, dates and locations
 Any other business and Adjourn
    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space
availability. With the approval of the chairman, members of the public
may present oral statements at the meeting.
    Persons wishing to present statements or obtain information should
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section. Members of the public may present a written statement to the
committee at any time.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on May 23 2014.
Mohannad Dawoud,
Management Analyst, Business Operations Group, ANG-A12, Federal
Aviation Administration.
[FR Doc. 2014-12568 Filed 5-29-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 168 (Tuesday, August 30, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53896-53897]
[FR Doc No: 2011-22092]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

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

    Docket Numbers: EG11-119-000.
    Applicants: Copper Mountain Solar 1, LLC.
    Description: Copper Mountain Solar 1, LLC Notice of Self-
Certification of Exempt Wholesale Generator Status.
    Filed Date: 08/22/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110822-5079.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, September 12, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: EG11-120-000.
    Applicants: Pinnacle Wind, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification as an Exempt Wholesale
Generator of Pinnacle Wind, LLC.
    Filed Date: 08/22/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110822-5213.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, September 12, 2011.

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

    Docket Numbers: ER11-4336-002.
    Applicants: ISO New England Inc.
    Description: ISO New England Inc. submits tariff filing per
35.17(b): Errata to Docket No. ER11-4336-001 to be effective 6/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 08/22/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110822-5084.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, September 12, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-4347-000.
    Applicants: ITC Midwest LLC.
    Description: ITC Midwest LLC submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii): Filing of Distribution-Transmission Agreement to be
effective 10/22/2011.
    Filed Date: 08/22/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110822-5086.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, September 12, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-4348-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, LLC.
    Description: PJM Interconnection, LLC submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii): Non-Queued Interconnection Service Agreement--
Original Service 2960 to be effective 7/21/2011.
    Filed Date: 08/22/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110822-5116.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, September 12, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-4349-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Southwest Power Pool, Inc. submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii): 2233 Osage Wind/GRDA Facilities Construction
Agreement to be effective 7/21/2011.
    Filed Date: 08/22/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110822-5144.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, September 12, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-4351-000.
    Applicants: Pinnacle Wind, LLC.
    Description: Pinnacle Wind, LLC submits tariff filing per 35.12:
Application for Market-Based Rate Authority to be effective 10/3/2011.
    Filed Date: 08/22/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110822-5166.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, September 12, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-4352-000.
    Applicants: Arizona Public Service Company.
    Description: Arizona Public Service Company submits tariff filing
per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): Service Agreement No. 312, LGIA of Perrin Ranch
Wind, LLC to be effective 8/23/2011.
    Filed Date: 08/22/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110822-5167.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, September 12, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-4353-000.
    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.
    Description: California Independent System Operator Corporation
submits tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 2011-08-22 CAISO Regulation
Energy Management Amendment to be effective 12/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 08/22/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110822-5222.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, September 12, 2011.

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

    Dated: August 23, 2011.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-22092 Filed 8-29-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P