[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 75 (Tuesday, April 19, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 21832-21833]
[FR Doc No: 2011-9398]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2011-0244 Airspace Docket No. 11-AAL-05]

Proposed Revision of Class E Airspace; Yakutat, AK

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to revise Class E airspace at Yakutat,
AK. The revision of eight Standard Instrument Approach Procedures
(SIAPs) at the Yakutat Airport has made this action necessary to
enhance safety and management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR)
operations.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 3, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on the proposal to the Docket Management
Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue,
SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-
0001. You must identify the docket number FAA-2011-0244/Airspace Docket
No. 11-AAL-05 at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit
comments on 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 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket
Office (telephone 1-800-647-5527) is on the plaza level of the
Department of Transportation NASSIF Building at the above address.
    An informal docket may also be examined during normal business
hours at the office of the Manager, Safety, Alaska Flight Service
Operations, Federal Aviation Administration, 222 West 7th Avenue, Box
14, Anchorage, AK 99513-7587.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Martha Dunn, Federal Aviation
Administration, 222 West 7th Avenue, Box 14, Anchorage, AK 99513-7587;
telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet address: http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ato/service_units/systemops/fs/alaskan/rulemaking/.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking 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. Commenters wishing the FAA to
acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with
those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the
following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket No. FAA-2011-0244/
Airspace Docket No. 11-AAL-05.'' The postcard will be date/time stamped
and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received on or 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
comments received. All comments submitted will be available for
examination in the public docket both before and after the closing date
for comments. 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 through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's web page at http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    Additionally, any person may obtain a copy of this notice by
submitting a request to the Federal Aviation Administration, Office of
Air Traffic Airspace Management, ATA-400, 800 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20591 or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. Communications must
identify both docket numbers for this notice. Persons interested in
being placed on a mailing list for future NPRM's should contact the
FAA's Office of Rulemaking,<PHONE_NUMBER>, to request a copy of
Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Distribution
System, which describes the application procedure.

The Proposal

    This action proposes to amend Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations
(14 CFR) part 71 by revising Class E airspace the Yakutat Airport, in
Yakutat, AK, to accommodate the revision of eight SIAPs at the Yakutat
Airport. This Class E airspace would provide adequate controlled
airspace upward from 700 feet and 1,200 feet above the surface, for the
safety and management of IFR operations at the Yakutat Airport. The
1,200 ft. airspace extends over Control Area 1487L and that airspace
will be amended in a future rule-making action.
    The Class E airspace areas designated as 700/1,200 foot transition
areas and the Offshore Airspace Areas are published in paragraphs 6005
and 6007, respectively, in FAA Order 7400.9U,

Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, signed August 18, 2010, and
effective September 15, 2010, which is incorporated by reference in 14
CFR 71.1. The airspaces listed in this document would be subsequently
published in that Order.
    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. Because this is a routine matter that
will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle 1, section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority.
    This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
subtitle VII, part A, subpart 1, section 40103, Sovereignty and use of
airspace. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing
regulations to ensure the safe and efficient use of the navigable
airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because
it proposes to revise Class E airspace at the Yakutat Airport, Yakutat,
AK, and represents the FAA's continuing effort to safely and
efficiently use the navigable airspace.

List 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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9U, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, signed August 18, 2010, and effective September 15,
2010, is to be amended as follows:
* * * * *

Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet or
more above the surface of the earth.

* * * * *

AAL AK E5 Yakutat, AK [Revised]

Yakutat Airport, AK
    (Lat. 59[deg]30'12'' N., long. 139[deg]39'37'' W.)
Yakutat VORTAC
    (Lat. 59[deg]30'39'' N., 139[deg]38'53'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within the area bounded by lat. 59[deg]47'42'' N., long.,
139[deg]58'48'' W., to lat. 59[deg]37'33'' N., long 139[deg]40'53''
W., then along the 7 mile radius of the Yakutat VORTAC clockwise to
59[deg]28'54'' N., long. 139[deg]25'35'' W., to lat. 59[deg]20'16''
N., long. 139[deg]10'20'' W., to lat. 59[deg]02'49'' N. long.
139[deg]47'45'' W., to lat. 59[deg]30'15'' N. long. 140[deg]36'43''
W., to the point of beginning; and that airspace extending upward
from 1,200 feet above the surface with a 75-mile radius of the
Yakutat VORTAC.

    Issued in Anchorage, AK, April 7, 2011.
Michael A. Tarr,
Manager, Alaska Flight Services Information Area Group.
[FR Doc. 2011-9398 Filed 4-18-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: January 18, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 13)]
[Notices]
[Page 3461]
[DOCID:fr18ja08-47]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EG08-18-000]

Langdon Wind, LLC; Notice of Filing

January 11, 2008.
    Take notice that on November 20, 2007, Langdon Wind, LLC, tendered
for filing a notice of self-certification of its status as an exempt
wholesale generator.
    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 on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

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

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on January 18, 2008.

 Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-867 Filed 1-17-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


53792 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 160 / Monday, August 19, 2002 / Notices ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [OPPT– 2002– 0048; FRL– 7192– 7]

Notification of Chemical Exports  TSCA Section 12( b); Request for Comment on Renewal of Information Collection Activities AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U. S. C. 3501 et seq.), EPA is seeking public comment on the following Information Collection Request (ICR): Notification of Chemical Exports  TSCA Section 12( b) (EPA ICR No. 0795.11, OMB Control No. 2070– 0030). This ICR involves a collection activity that is currently approved and scheduled to expire on January 31, 2003. The information collected under this ICR relates to reporting requirements found at 40 CFR part 707, subpart D, with respect to companies exporting certain chemicals from the United States to foreign countries. Before submitting this ICR to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval under the PRA, EPA is soliciting comments on specific aspects of the collection.

DATES: Written comments, identified by the docket ID number OPPT– 2002– 0048, must be received on or before October 18, 2002. ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted by mail, electronically, or in person. Please follow the detailed instructions for each method as provided in Unit III. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, it is imperative that you identify docket ID number OPPT– 2002– 0048 in the subject line on the first page of your response. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information contact: Barbara Cunningham, Acting Director, Environmental Assistance Division (7408M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 554– 1404; e mail address: TSCA Hotline@ epa. gov. For technical information contact: Keith Cronin, Chemical Control Division (7405M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 564– 8102; fax number: (202) 564– 4775; e mail address: cronin. keith@ epa. gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Does this Action Apply to Me?

You may be potentially affected by this action if you are a company that exports or engages in wholesale sales of chemical substances or mixtures. Potentially affected categories and entities may include, but are not limited to:

Type of business NAICS codes Chemical manufacturing 325 Petroleum refineries 32411 This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this action. Other types of entities not listed in this table could also be affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes are provided to assist you and others in determining whether or not this action might apply to certain entities. 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 Additional Information, Including Copies of this Document and Other Related Documents?

A. Electronically You may obtain electronic copies of this document, and certain other related documents that might be available electronically, from the EPA Internet Home Page at http:// www. epa. gov/. On the Home Page select `` Laws and Regulations, '' `` Regulations and Proposed Rules, '' and then look up the entry for this document under the `` Federal Register— Environmental Documents. '' You can also go directly to the Federal Register listings at http:// www. epa. gov/ fedrgstr/.

B. Fax on Demand Using a faxphone call (202) 564– 3119 and select item 4098 for a copy of the ICR.

C. In Person The Agency has established an official record for this action under docket ID number OPPT– 2002– 0048. The official record consists of the documents specifically referenced in this action, any public comments received during an applicable comment period, and other information related to this action, including any information claimed as Confidential Business Information (CBI). This official record includes the documents that are physically located in the docket, as well as the documents that are referenced in those documents. The public version of the official record does not include any information claimed as CBI. The public version of the official record, which includes printed, paper versions of any electronic comments submitted during an applicable comment period, is available for inspection in the TSCA Nonconfidential Information Center, North East Mall Rm. B– 607, Waterside Mall, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC. The Center is open from noon to 4 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Center is (202) 260– 7099.

III. How Can I Respond to this Action?

A. How and to Whom Do I Submit the Comments?

You may submit comments through the mail, in person, or electronically. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, it is imperative that you identify docket ID number OPPT– 2002– 0048 on the subject line on the first page of your response. 1. By mail. Submit your comments to: Document Control Office (7407M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. 2. In person or by courier. Deliver your comments to: OPPT Document Control Office (DCO) in EPA East Building Rm. 6428, 1201 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The DCO is open from 8 a. m. to 4 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the DCO is (202) 564– 8930. 3. Electronically. Submit your comments and/ or data electronically by e mail to: oppt. ncic@ epa. gov, or mail your computer disk to the address identified in Units III. A. 1. and 2. Do not submit any information electronically that you consider to be CBI. Electronic comments must be submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the use of special characters and any form of encryption. Comments and data will also be accepted on standard disks in WordPerfect 6.1/ 8.0 or ASCII file format. All comments in electronic form must be identified by docket ID number OPPT– 2002– 0048. Electronic comments may also be filed online at many Federal Depository Libraries.

B. How Should I Handle CBI that I Want to Submit to the Agency?

Do not submit any information electronically that you consider to be CBI. You may claim information that VerDate Aug< 2,> 2002 13: 32 Aug 16, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 19AUN1. SGM pfrm15 PsN: 19AUN1 53793 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 160 / Monday, August 19, 2002 / Notices you submit to EPA in response to this document as CBI by marking any part or all of that information as CBI. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes any information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public version of the official record. Information not marked confidential will be included in the public version of the official record without prior notice. If you have any questions about CBI or the procedures for claiming CBI, please consult the technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

C. What Should I Consider when I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your comments: 1. Explain your views as clearly as possible. 2. Describe any assumptions that you used. 3. Provide copies of any technical information and/ or data you used that support your views. 4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you arrived at the estimate that you provide. 5. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns. 6. Offer alternative ways to improve the collection activity. 7. Make sure to submit your comments by the deadline in this notice. 8. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, be sure to identify the docket ID number assigned to this action in the subject line on the first page of your response. You may also provide the name, date, and Federal Register citation.

D. What Information is EPA Particularly Interested in?

Pursuant to section 3506( c)( 2)( A) of the PRA, EPA specifically solicits comments and information to enable it to: 1. Evaluate whether the proposed collections of information are necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will have practical utility. 2. Evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimates of the burdens of the proposed collections of information. 3. Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected. 4. Minimize the burden of the collections of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated or electronic collection technologies or other forms of information technology, e. g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

IV. What Information Collection Activity or ICR Does this Action Apply to? EPA is seeking comments on the following ICR: Title: Notification of Chemical Exports  TSCA Section 12( b). ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 0795.11, OMB Control No. 2070– 0030. ICR status: This ICR is currently scheduled to expire on January 31, 2003. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information that is subject to approval under PRA, unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's information collections appear on the collection instruments or instructions, in the Federal Register notices for related rulemakings and ICR notices, and, if the collection is contained in a regulation, in a table of OMB approval numbers in 40 CFR part 9. Abstract: Section 12( b)( 2) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) requires that any person who exports or intends to export to a foreign country a chemical substance or mixture that is regulated under TSCA sections 4, 5, 6, and/ or 7 submit to EPA notification of such export or intent to export. Upon receipt of notification, EPA will advise the government of the importing country of the United States regulatory action with respect to that substance. EPA uses the information obtained from the submitter via this collection to advise the government of the importing country. Responses to the collection of information are mandatory (see 40 CFR part 707). Respondents may claim all or part of a document confidential. EPA will disclose information that is covered by a claim of confidentiality only to the extent permitted by, and in accordance with, the procedures in TSCA section 14 and 40 CFR part 2.

V. What are EPA's Burden and Cost Estimates for this ICR? Under the PRA, `` burden'' means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal Agency. For this collection it includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. The ICR provides a detailed explanation of this estimate, which is only briefly summarized in this notice. The annual public burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 0.993 hours per response. The following is a summary of the estimates taken from the ICR: Respondents/ affected entities: Respondents or affected entities are expected to include companies that export from the United States to foreign countries, or that engage in wholesale sales of, chemical substances or mixtures. Estimated total number of potential respondents: 500. Frequency of response: Annually. Estimated average number of responses for each respondent: 15. Estimated total annual burden hours: 7,450. Estimated total annual burden costs: $452,055.

VI. Are There Changes in the Estimates from the Last Approval?

There is a decrease of 2,950 hours (from 10,400 hours to 7,450 hours) in the total estimated respondent burden compared with that identified in the information collection request most recently approved by OMB. This change reflects EPA's experience over the past 3 years, in which there has been an increase in the number of reporting firms but a decrease in the number of notices per firm than anticipated at the time of the last approval of this information collection. The net result is a decrease in burden hours (adjustment).

VII. What is the Next Step in the Process for this ICR?

EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. EPA will issue another Federal Register notice pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.5( a)( 1)( iv) to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB. If you have any VerDate Aug< 2,> 2002 13: 32 Aug 16, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 19AUN1. SGM pfrm15 PsN: 19AUN1 53794 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 160 / Monday, August 19, 2002 / Notices questions about this ICR or the approval process, please contact the technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

List of Subjects Environmental protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: August 8, 2002. Susan B. Hazen, Acting Assistant Administrator for Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances.

[FR Doc. 02– 20993 Filed 8– 16– 02; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560– 50– S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [OPPT– 2002– 0050; FRL– 7195– 6]

Certain New Chemicals; Receipt and Status Information AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: Section 5 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) requires any person who intends to manufacture (defined by statute to include import) a new chemical (i. e., a chemical not on the TSCA Inventory) to notify EPA and comply with the statutory provisions pertaining to the manufacture of new chemicals. Under sections 5( d)( 2) and 5( d)( 3) of TSCA, EPA is required to publish a notice of receipt of a premanufacture notice (PMN) or an application for a test marketing exemption (TME), and to publish periodic status reports on the chemicals under review and the receipt of notices of commencement to manufacture those chemicals. This status report, which covers the period from July 8, 2002 to July 22, 2002, consists of the PMNs pending or expired, and the notices of commencement to manufacture a new chemical that the Agency has received under TSCA section 5 during this time period. The `` S'' and `` G'' that precede the chemical names denote whether the chemical idenity is specific or generic.

DATES: Comments identified by the docket ID number OPPT– 2002– 0050 and the specific PMN number, must be received on or before September 18, 2002.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted by mail, electronically, or in person. Please follow the detailed instructions for each method as provided in Unit I. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, it is imperative that you identify docket ID number OPPT– 2002– 0050 and the specific PMN number in the subject line on the first page of your response. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara Cunningham, Director, Office of Program Management and Evaluation, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (7401), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 554– 1404; e mail address: TSCA Hotline@ epa. gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information A. Does this Action Apply to Me? This action is directed to the public in general. As such, the Agency has not attempted to describe the specific entities that this action may apply to. Although others may be affected, this action applies directly to the submitter of the premanufacture notices addressed in the action. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How Can I Get Additional Information, Including Copies of this Document and Other Related Documents? 1. Electronically. You may obtain copies of this document and certain other available documents from the EPA Internet Home Page at http:// www. epa. gov/. On the Home Page select `` Laws and Regulations'', '' Regulations and Proposed Rules, and then look up the entry for this document under the `` Federal Register— Environmental Documents. '' You can also go directly to the Federal Register listings at http:// www. epa. gov/ fedrgstr/. 2. In person. The Agency has established an official record for this action under docket ID number OPPT– 2002– 0050. The official record consists of the documents specifically referenced in this action, any public comments received during an applicable comment period, and other information related to this action, including any information claimed as confidential business information (CBI). This official record includes the documents that are physically located in the docket, as well as the documents that are referenced in those documents. The public version of the official record does not include any information claimed as CBI. The public version of the official record, which includes printed, paper versions of any electronic comments submitted during an applicable comment period, any test data submitted by the Manufacturer/ Importer is available for inspection in the TSCA Nonconfidential Information Center, North East Mall Rm. B– 607, Waterside Mall, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC. The Center is open from noon to 4 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number of the Center is (202) 260– 7099.

C. How and to Whom Do I Submit Comments? You may submit comments through the mail, in person, or electronically. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, it is imperative that you identify docket ID number OPPT– 2002– 0050 and the specific PMN number in the subject line on the first page of your response. 1. By mail. Submit your comments to: Document Control Office (7407), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. 2. In person or by courier. Deliver your comments to: OPPT Document Control Office (DCO) in EPA East Building Rm. 6428, 1201 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The DCO is open from 8 a. m. to 4 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the DCO is (202) 564– 8930. 3. Electronically. You may submit your comments electronically by e mail to: `` oppt. ncic@ epa. gov, '' or mail your computer disk to the address identified in this unit. Do not submit any information electronically that you consider to be CBI. Electronic comments must be submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the use of special characters and any form of encryption. Comments and data will also be accepted on standard disks in WordPerfect 6.1/ 8.0 or ASCII file format. All comments in electronic form must be identified by docket ID number OPPT– 2002– 0050 and the specific PMN number. Electronic comments may also be filed online at many Federal Depository Libraries.

D. How Should I Handle CBI that I Want to Submit to the Agency? Do not submit any information electronically that you consider to be CBI. You may claim information that you submit to EPA in response to this document as CBI by marking any part or all of that information as CBI. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes any information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be VerDate Aug< 2,> 2002 13: 32 Aug 16, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 19AUN1. SGM pfrm15 PsN: 19AUN1


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 165 (Thursday, August 25, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53119-53120]
[FR Doc No: 2011-21686]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

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

    Docket Numbers: EC11-105-000.
    Applicants: Long Island Solar Farm, LLC, BP Solar, LISF Solar Trust
(MetLife).
    Description: Application for Authorization of Disposition of
Jurisdictional Facilities Under Section 203 of the Federal Power Act
and Requests for Expedited Consideration and Confidential Treatment of
Long Island Solar Farm, LLC, et. al.
    Filed Date: 08/16/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110816-5126.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, September 6, 2011.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG11-118-000.
    Applicants: Copper Crossing Solar LLC.
    Description: Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale Generator
Status of Copper Crossing Solar LLC.
    Filed Date: 08/16/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110816-5138.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, September 6, 2011.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER08-850-002.
    Applicants: New York Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Report/Form of New York Independent System Operator,
Inc.
    Filed Date: 08/16/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110816-5157.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, September 6, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2629-004.
    Applicants: FirstLight Power Resources Management, LLC.
    Description: FirstLight Power Resources Management, LLC submits
tariff filing per: FLPRM Supplemental Record to be effective 8/16/2011.
    Filed Date: 08/16/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110816-5094.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, September 6, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2636-004.
    Applicants: Mt. Tom Generating Company, LLC.
    Description: Mt. Tom Generating Company, LLC submits tariff filing
per: Mt. Tom Supplement to be effective 8/16/2011.
    Filed Date: 08/16/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110816-5095.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, September 6, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3753-000.
    Applicants: People's Power & Gas, LLC
    Description: Supplemental Comments of People's Power & Gas, LLC.
    Filed Date: 08/16/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110816-5152.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, September 6, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3851-001.
    Applicants: Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation.
    Description: Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation
submits tariff filing per 35.17(b): 2011--8-15--NSP-WPL Amend Cert of
Con--311 to be effective 6/20/2011.
    Filed Date: 08/15/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110815-5112.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, September 6, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3852-001.
    Applicants: Northern States Power Company, a Wisconsin corporation.
    Description: Northern States Power Company, a Wisconsin corporation
submits tariff filing per 35.17(b): 2011-8-15--Amend--NSPW-WPL-Cert of
Con to be effective 6/20/2011.
    Filed Date: 08/15/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110815-5119.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, September 6, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3989-001.
    Applicants: Michigan Wind 2, LLC.
    Description: Michigan Wind 2, LLC submits tariff filing per
35.17(b): Amendment to Application for Market-Based Rate Authorization
to be effective 9/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 08/17/2011.

    Accession Number: 20110817-5070.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, August 29, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-4318-000.
    Applicants: San Diego Gas & Electric Company.
    Description: San Diego Gas & Electric Company submits Transmission
Owner Formula 3 Rate filing.
    Filed Date: 08/15/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110816-0202.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, September 6, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-4319-000.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
submits tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: IP08 Termination to be
effective 10/16/2011.
    Filed Date: 08/16/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110816-5096.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, September 6, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-4320-000.
    Applicants: Arizona Public Service Company.
    Description: Arizona Public Service Company submits tariff filing
per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: Amendment to Service Agreement No. 174 to be
effective 7/17/2011.
    Filed Date: 08/16/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110816-5136.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, September 6, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-4321-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Southern California Edison Company submits tariff
filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: SGIA WDT SERV AG SCE-GPS 2501 W. San
Bernardino, Redlands Roof Top Solar Project to be effective 8/18/2011.
    Filed Date: 08/17/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110817-5000.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, September 7, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-4322-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Southern California Edison Company submits tariff
filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: SGIA WDT SERV AG SCE-GPS 2250 Sequoia Ave
Ontario Roof Top Solar Project to be effective 8/18/2011.
    Filed Date: 08/17/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110817-5001.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, September 7, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-4323-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Southern California Edison Company submits tariff
filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: SGIA WDT SERV AG SCE-GPS 570 E. Mill St San
Bernardino Roof Top Solar Project to be effective 8/18/2011.
    Filed Date: 08/17/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110817-5002.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, September 7, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-4324-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Southern California Edison Company submits tariff
filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: SGIA WDT SERV AG SCE-GPS 3800 E.
Philadelphia St Ontario Roof Top Solar Project to be effective 8/18/
2011.
    Filed Date: 08/17/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110817-5003.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, September 7, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-4325-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Southern California Edison Company submits tariff
filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: SGIA WDT SERV AG SCE-GPS 13550 Valley Blvd
Fontana Roof Top Solar Project to be effective 8/18/2011.
    Filed Date: 08/17/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110817-5004.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, September 7, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-4326-000.
    Applicants: Viridian Energy MD LLC.
    Description: Viridian Energy MD LLC submits tariff filing per
35.12: Viridian Energy MD LLC Market Based Rate Tariff to be effective
9/15/2011.
    Filed Date: 08/17/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110817-5006.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, September 7, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-4327-000.
    Applicants: Entergy Arkansas, Inc.
    Description: Entergy Arkansas, Inc. submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii: Attachment T Planning Horizon Amendment to be
effective 10/16/2011.
    Filed Date: 08/17/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110817-5088.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, September 7, 2011.

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

    Docket Numbers: ES11-42-000.
    Applicants: Interstate Power and Light Company.
    Description: Interstate Power and Light Company submits Form 523
Application for authorization to issue securities and request for
waiver of competitive bidding requirements.
    Filed Date: 08/17/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110817-5106.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, September 7, 2011.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
reliability filings

    Docket Numbers: RD11-10-000.
    Applicants: North American Electric Reliability Corporation.
    Description: Petition of the North American Electric Reliability
Corporation for Approval of Proposed Reliability Standard FAC-008-3--
Facility Ratings.
    Filed Date: 06/15/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110615-5154.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, September 16, 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 17, 2011.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-21686 Filed 8-24-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 105 (Tuesday, June 2, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31430-31432]
[FR Doc No: 2015-13326]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-75057; File No. SR-NYSE-2015-25]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Amend Section 804.00 of the Listed Company Manual To Specify That
Issuers Seeking a Review of a Delisting Decision Made by the Staff of
NYSE Regulation, Inc. Must Have Paid All Prior Fees Owed to the
Exchange

May 28, 2015.
    Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby given
that on May 13, 2015, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or
``Exchange'') 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\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend section 804.00 of the Listed Company
Manual (the ``Manual'') to specify that issuers seeking a review of a
delisting decision made by the staff of NYSE Regulation, Inc. (``NYSE
Regulation'') must have paid all prior fees owed to the Exchange before
the Exchange will accept payment of the applicable appeal fee.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and
at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend section 804.00 of the Manual to
specify that issuers seeking a review of a delisting decision made by
the staff of NYSE Regulation must have paid all prior fees owed to the
Exchange before the Exchange will accept payment of the applicable
appeal fee.
    Companies listed on the Exchange are subject to certain fees
throughout the life of their listing, including annual fees for each
class or series of security listed on the Exchange as well as fees
associated with initial and supplemental listing applications. Although
all fees are due immediately when billed, on some limited occasions
listed companies fail to remit payment for fees due to the Exchange. If
payment is not received when due, the Exchange has procedures in place
to collect on outstanding bills. In the event that a listed company
repeatedly fails to pay fees due to the Exchange, it can be subject to
delisting.
    NYSE Regulation monitors listed companies for compliance with

Exchange rules and can initiate delisting proceedings in the event of
non-compliance. Listed companies that are subject to a delisting
determination by the staff of NYSE Regulation have the right to appeal
staff's determination to the Committee for Review (the ``Committee'')
of the Board of Directors of NYSE Regulation. Currently, companies that
would like to undertake such appeal must pay a $20,000 nonrefundable
appeal fee.
    In the Exchange's experience, listed companies that are non-
compliant with Exchange rules--and thus subject to delisting--
frequently also struggle financially and may be unable to pay their
vendors or service providers. It is possible, therefore, that a company
subject to delisting for failure to comply with Exchange rules may also
be delinquent in the payment of fees due to the Exchange. Should NYSE
Regulation commence delisting proceedings against such company, the
Exchange believes it is fair to require that the company first pay all
past-due fees before it can submit the applicable appeal fee and
request a review of staff's delisting decision.
    When a company appeals a delisting determination to the Committee,
the staff of NYSE Regulation invests a significant amount of time and
effort preparing appeal briefs and other related documentation. Before
the staff of NYSE Regulation expends these additional resources, it
believes it is appropriate to require that companies seeking an appeal
have paid the Exchange in full for all services already provided. The
Exchange proposes to amend section 804.00 of the Manual to make this
requirement explicit. The proposed requirement is consistent with the
rules of the NYSE MKT which has a comparable rule.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See section 1203(a) of the NYSE MKT Company Guide.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with section 6(b) of the Act,\5\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of sections 6(b)(4) \6\ of the Act, in particular, in that
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 section 6(b)(5) \7\ of the Act
in that it is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers. The Exchange further believes
that the proposed rule change is consistent with section 6(b)(7) \8\ of
the Act because listed companies will still have adequate due process
rights to appeal any delisting action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable to require that a
company seeking to appeal a delisting determination made by NYSE
Regulation first pay all past due fees owed to the Exchange. All
companies listed on the Exchange are subject to annual and other fees.
The Exchange believes that its proposal is reasonable because it is
consistent with the Exchange's goal of ensuring that all issuers pay
for the benefit of having their securities listed on the Exchange as
well as other regulatory benefits received from the Exchange and
therefore ensures that fees are equitably allocated among listed
companies. The proposed rule change is not designed to permit unfair
discrimination because all listed companies seeking to appeal a
delisting decision will be subject to the provisions of section 804.00
of the Manual and each company will be required to pay only the amount
it has incurred under the Exchange's fee rules as generally applied to
all listed companies.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed change simply
requires that listed companies first pay all past due fees owed to the
Exchange before they can request an appeal of a delisting
determination. Such requirement ensures that all listed companies pay
for the benefit of having their securities listed on the Exchange.
Accordingly, the Exchange does not believe that the proposed change
will impose any burden on competition.

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

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

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

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \9\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\10\
Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the
protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative prior to
30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \10\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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) \11\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 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-NYSE-2015-25 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-NYSE-2015-25. 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 Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent

amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule
change that are filed with the Commission, and all written
communications relating to the proposed rule change between the
Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from
the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for Web site viewing and printing in the Commission's Public
Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official
business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of
such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted
without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to
File Number SR-NYSE-2015-25 and should be submitted on or before June
23, 2015.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

[FR Doc. 2015-13326 Filed 6-1-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


                    UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                            -  -  - WASHINGTON D.C., 20460
                                        -  -

                                                   OFFICE OFCHEMICAL SAFETY AND
                                                       POLLUTION PREVENTION

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:	Response to Comments on the Economic Minor Use Draft Pesticide Registration Notice

FROM:	Andrew Reighart, Economist
	Derek Berwald, Economist
	TJ Wyatt, Economist
	Economic Analysis Branch
		Biological and Economic Analysis Division (7503P)

THRU:	Tim Kiely, Chief
		Economic Analysis Branch
	Biological and Economic Analysis Division (7503P)

TO: 	EPA Docket: EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0814

Introduction

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced the availability of and sought public comment on a draft Pesticide Registration Notice (PR Notice) entitled "Determination of Minor Use under Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), section 2(ll)" EPA Docket: EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0814. PR Notices are issued by the Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) to inform pesticide registrants and other interested persons about important policies, procedures, and registration-related decisions, and in most cases serve to provide guidance to pesticide registrants and OPP personnel. This PR Notice replaces PR Notice 97-2 and provides guidance to the registrant as to how the EPA determines a "minor use," a classification the EPA employs to identify and encourage the registration of pesticides for beneficial uses that might otherwise not be addressed because of low market incentives. EPA published the draft PR Notice on June 6, 2016 (81 FR 38704), and requested comments on the guidance for how EPA will evaluate a petition for minor use.  This document responds to those comments.

FIFRA defines a minor use of a pesticide as either: (1) a use on a crop grown on 300,000 acres or less in the United States or (2) a use that lacks sufficient economic incentive to seek or maintain a registration but has private or social value. This PR Notice provides guidance to the registrant concerning the method EPA will use to determine if a use site is a "minor use" as defined by FIFRA 2(ll)(1) and 2(ll)(2). In particular, the PR Notice describes the method for determining if the use "does not provide sufficient economic incentive." To date, EPA's interpretation of economic minor use in section 2(ll)(2) has been shaped by guidance provided in PR Notice 97-2. However, EPA has determined that the approach outlined in PR Notice 97-2 lacked consideration of critical factors for determining whether a use should be a minor use under FIFRA section 2(ll)(2).

This PR Notice clarifies that the United States Department of Agriculture's (USDA) most recent  Census of Agriculture is the appropriate source for data on acreage in the United States to establish a minor use under the acreage definition in FIFRA section 2(ll)(1). This PR Notice also describes the revised approach to evaluate "sufficient economic incentive" that explicitly considers (1) the difference in time between incurring costs of generating data for registration and obtaining revenue from product sales, (2) the multiple years over which revenue is generated, and (3) the costs of producing and distributing the product. This PR Notice also provides suggestions about the data that can be used to conduct the analysis. Finally, this PR Notice explains how qualitative information may be used to inform the quantitative analysis and interpret the results.

EPA is responding to comments received in EPA Docket EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0814. Comments were submitted by CropLife America, Responsible Industry for a Sound Environment, Bayer CropScience, the USA Dry Pea & Lentil Council, the Minor Crop Famer Alliance, the USDA's Office of Pest Management Policy, and one anonymous submitter.

The Agency appreciates the comments that were submitted to the docket on the draft revision of the Economic Minor Use PR Notice. Most comments were broadly supportive of the endeavor to improve upon PR Notice 97-2. These comments supported the new process to qualify for minor use registration under FIFRA as more appropriate and simple by clarifying and updating economic definitions and treating registration of a pesticide as an investment. These comments have specific suggestions that can, for the most part, be organized into three broad topics around which the Agency will structure its response. Certain other comments which fall outside these three topic categories will also be addressed.

The economic minor use designation plays an important role in protecting communities from specific pest threats and thus the cooperation between federal agencies, pesticide registrants, and crop consultants and advisors is critical to reforming the guidance to make it more user-friendly for registrants.

Comment Summaries and EPA Responses

Comment Category 1: 300,000-acre limit

 Comment Summary:
         When in the growing season is crop cultivation acreage determined?

         EPA Response:
         The acreage planted to a crop may not be the same as the acreage harvested. EPA intends to use acreage harvested published in the USDA Census of Agriculture as the measure of acres to determine whether a crop is below the 300,000-acre threshold. This may tend to reduce the acreage estimate, but harvested area reflects crop production better than planted area, which may not be reported for all crops. For perennial crops, bearing acreage is the most appropriate measure.

 Comment Summary:
         Given that the USDA Census of Agriculture is undertaken only every five years, and there is a delay between the census and its release to the public, the Agency should consider other sources of acreage information so as to address these timing limitations.

         EPA Response:
         While the Agency appreciates the suggestion to consider other sources of agricultural information to address the timing limitations of the Census, as explained in the PR Notice, EPA will continue to rely solely on the USDA Census of Agriculture given that: (1) it is the most accurate source of acreage information; (2) non-census years are surveys that may not have the same coverage as the census; (3) EPA consulted with USDA and determined that the Census of Agriculture was the appropriate source of data.

 Comment Summary:
      Raise the 300,000-acre limit upwards.

         EPA Response:
         The 300,000-acre criterion cannot be raised upwards because it is specifically stated in FIFRA Section 2(ll).

 Comment Summary:
         Could the 300,000-acre limit refer to portions of a crop, such as areas affected by specific pests, diseases, or weed problems as opposed to the total crop area?

         EPA Response:
         No, using portions of a crop to determine whether the acreage threshold is satisfied is not appropriate under the FIFRA definition in 2(ll)(1).

 Comment Summary:
         Commenters also suggested that EPA clarify what part of the Census of Agriculture will be used for the acreage determination, since several tables report crop area.

         EPA Response:
         EPA will use data reported in the Census of Agriculture for determining the crop acreage. EPA can not specify the tables from the Census of Agriculture that will be used, because over time table numbers and table titles change.

Comment Category 2: EPA's Test Cost Calculation and Assumptions

 Comment Summary:
           EPA has information that will be used as estimates of the costs of required data, and should make its database on test costs be made publicly available.

           EPA Response:
           EPA will make the test cost estimates available.

 Comment Summary:
           The EPA should acknowledge that test costs can vary widely and that the EPA's own cost estimates are provided only for simplicity's sake.

     EPA Response:
           EPA does acknowledge that tests costs can vary from its own estimates, and clarifies that in the final PR Notice. The cost estimates are provided for simplicity of analysis's sake, and consistency across applicants. EPA will consider information provided by applicants on a case-by-case basis, and will update estimates of test costs over time.

 Comment Summary:
           Other comments received in this category sought to determine how often EPA's cost estimates were updated.

     EPA Response:
           At present, the baseline test costs are only updated as needed, usually for an EPA rulemaking or a revision to an Information Collection Request. These are usually updated by adjusting existing cost estimates for inflation.

 Comment Summary:
           Some registrants desired the ability to submit test cost information on a voluntary basis so that EPA could take these data points into account beyond its own estimated averages.

      EPA Response:
           EPA will consider other factors qualitatively to refine and interpret quantitative estimates such as other registration costs, co-occurring investments, market structure, time horizon, test costs, etc. on a case-by-case basis. These could include test costs. If the information provided is of sufficient quality, EPA may use submitted test costs for revising these estimates.

Comment Category 3: Investment Paradigm

 Comment Summary:
      Clarification needed on how the benefit cost ratio (BCR), the internal rate of return (IRR), and net present value (NPV) would be used in the economic minor use designation given the draft's discussion of all three concepts.

      EPA Response:
      EPA intends to use all three measures when considering whether there is insufficient economic incentive to pursue a pesticide registration. Each of the measures provides insight into the investment problem facing the firm. The NPV and the BCR should be in agreement about whether an investment is potentially profitable, but they present the information in different ways: the NPV shows the result in dollars, while the benefit cost ratio has a natural scaling that compares the size of the investment with the potential return. EPA does not intend to use a rigid NPV > 0 or BCR > 1 as a standard of profitability, because firms might require a higher threshold in individual cases. Although the IRR can sometimes be problematic, particularly in cases with cash flows show large variations, it is still a useful measure because it presents the investment in terms of a percentage return, that can be compared to the cost of capital or alternative investments.  It also does not require the ex-ante assumption of a specific discount rates, which may vary among registrants.

 Comment Summary:
      What is the basis for the EPA's cost assumptions that production costs are 60-85% of a company's gross revenue? The commenter further suggested using the annual reports for pesticide companies to look at costs as a share of total revenue.

      EPA Response:
      Rather than ask applicants and registrants to submit data on production costs, EPA is proposing that all cases be evaluated using values for costs that range from 60 to 85 percent of gross revenue (or the net revenue from the sales of a chemical are 15 to 40 percent of gross). Qualitative information can be used to characterize which end of the range is likely. Using the bounded and fixed cost assumption makes the process simpler for registrants, and doesn't require possibly confidential cost data. In addition, using the same range for all applicants treats them equally, neither rewarding them for low cost production and distribution, which would tend to increase the NPV or BCR or high costs.

      EPA did spot check the annual reports of a few pesticide registrants, and cost of goods sold as a share of gross revenue was within the range proposed. However, this financial information was reported for the parent firm, and may reflect other industries besides pesticide production or even chemical production. Moreover, the average for a company may not reflect the net revenue expected from a particular product sold for a particular use.

 Comment Summary:
Commenters suggested an alternative way to calculate the BCR, in which the present value of annual recurring costs, like the cost of production are used in the denominator of the BCR:

BCRalt= t=1TPt·qtC0+t=1T(cqt+γ)

      Where Pt is the price of the pesticide per unit, qt is the quantity sold, c(qt) is the cost of manufacturing and distributing the pesticide and depends on the quantity sold, and γt are other costs that do not depend on the amount sold such as the registration maintenance fee, legal fees, and advertising costs, and C0 is the initial cash investment (registration costs).  The commenter described this as more accurately reflecting the actual investment and cost streams faced by registrants.

      Alternatively, the commenter suggested EPA abandon consideration of BCR entirely.

      EPA Response:
      EPA disagrees with the commenters suggestions. The suggested alternative definition is not the standard definition for a benefit cost ratio, and breaks the relationship between the NPV and BCR. The definition in the PR Notice is appropriate for evaluating the question of whether a firm has insufficient economic incentive to register a pesticide. The costs the commenter suggests using in the numerator are more appropriately part of the net revenue stream, rather than initial investment costs. This is clarified in the final PR Notice.

 Comment Summary:
      A commenter pointed out that the costs of registration do not necessarily occur only during the first year of the investment.

      EPA Response:
      EPA agrees with the commenter, that the initial costs of registration may occur over multiple years, and in many cases can continue after a conditional registration is granted.  If there were several years of registration costs prior to significant revenue generation, this would tend to lower the NPV, relative to assuming all costs are borne in the first year, after which revenues begin.  This is a qualitative factor that applicants could provide to help EPA make a determination.

 Comment Summary:
      Commenters pointed out that the range of cost estimates could be a determining factor of whether the NPV criterion for a minor use is satisfied.

      EPA Response:
      EPA agrees that the NPV criterion could be satisfied at one end of the range but not the other. However, qualitative information can be used to characterize which end of the range is likely. For example, if the potential minor use accounts for a large proportion of total sales of an active ingredient relative to existing uses, the marginal cost of production is likely to be near the higher percentage of revenue because it represents a larger movement along the marginal cost curve. Qualitative considerations include aspects that increase the unit production cost, c(qt), such as particularly costly raw materials, or that affect fixed costs, γ, for example, the development of a new distribution channel associated with the potential minor use.

 Comment Summary:
      Was the modeled 7% discount rate featured in example models found within the draft simply used as an example, as opposed to formal guidance directing registrants to adopt this standard in its investment modeling?

      EPA Response:
      EPA does not intend to give registrants direction about what discount they should use for modeling. The Office of Management and Budget specifies that EPA use 3% and 7% discount rates in analyses, where the 7% is intended to reflect a private sector discount rate. To be consistent across applications, EPA intends to use the 7% discount rate for estimating NPV and BCR for determination whether a new use qualifies as an economic minor use, but EPA does not intend to specify a discount rate for registrants to apply for their own use.

 Comment Summary:
      Will EPA use the standalone project analysis benchmark for assessing investment?

      EPA Response:
      Yes, EPA intends to treat investment decisions as stand-alone projects, but recognizes that some costs may be shared across different products or use sites, and should not be double-counted for the purpose of analysis.

Comment Category 4: Other Comments

 Comment Summary:
Are non-agricultural products covered by the PR Notice and this revision?

      EPA Response:
Yes, non-agricultural products are included.

 Comment Summary:
Registrants should be able to include `basic data,' such as R&D, crop safety, and efficacy data as costs of registration.

      EPA Response:
      The cost of registering a particular use includes the data that are required for the registration of that use. Thus, if `basic data' are supporting multiple uses, a registrant cannot count the data generation costs multiple times. Only the additional data needed for the new minor use registration will be used. Costs such as R&D, crop safety, and efficacy data are not specifically registration costs, so they are not included in the calculation of registration costs.

 Comment Summary:
Costs of registration may still outweigh the benefits and thus the EPA should offer further incentives beyond registration as a minor use.

      EPA Response:
      That request is beyond the action taken here.

 Comment Summary:
	Include `label development' costs in the return calculations.

      EPA Response:
      Label development costs that are specifically associated with the registration of a new minor use would be relevant.

 Comment Summary:
      Firms should not have exclusive use of data, which will reduce transparency and reduce EPA's ability to track poisons in the environment.

      EPA Response:
      FIFRA creates exclusive use rights for the data used for registration, and that cannot be changed through this PR Notice.

 Comment Summary:
      EPA should extend minor use incentives to all specialty crops, as defined by USDA.

      EPA Response:
      FIFRA specifies incentives to be applied to minor uses, and not all specialty crops as defined by USDA are minor uses. All crops, however, may apply for status as a minor use, and will be evaluated as described in this PR Notice.

 Comment Summary:
The entire PR Notice 97-2 should be republished.  To reduce or avoid the potential for confusion among registrants, the entire PR Notice 97-2 should be updated at this time to clarify which portions are still in effect.

      EPA Response:
      This final PR Notice supersedes PR Notice 97-2.  PR Notice 97-2 will be archived and no longer be relevant

 Comment Summary:
A commenter wanted the PR Notice to specifically mention additional reasons a registrant may wish to pursue a minor use designation beyond qualifying for additional years of exclusive use of data under FIFRA §3(c)(1)(F)(ii).

      EPA Response:
      The final PR Notice includes an acknowledgment of "Obtaining an exemption from or partial waiver of the PRIA fee for the minor use under FIFRA §33(b)(7)(D)."  Although the PR Notice lists some reasons that registrants might want to pursue a minor use registration, this is not intended as an exhaustive list.


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 115 (Thursday, June 15, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 39168-39169]
[FR Doc No: 2023-12783]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2023-0947; Airspace Docket No. 23-ASW-12]
RIN 2120-AA66

Establishment of Class E Airspace; Berclair, TX

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action establishes Class E airspace at Berclair, TX. This
action is the result of a request from the U.S. Navy to establish Class
E airspace at Goliad NOLF, Berclair, TX, to support instrument
procedures at this airport.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, October 5, 2023. The Director of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by reference action under 1 CFR
part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order JO 7400.11 and
publication of conforming amendments.

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

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that

section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the
use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the
efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority as it establishes Class E airspace extending upward from 700
feet above the surface at Goliad NOLF, Berclair, TX, to support
instrument flight rule operations at this airport.

History

    The FAA published an NPRM for Docket No. FAA-2023-0947 in the
Federal Register (88 FR 22933; April 14, 2023) proposing to establish
Class E airspace at Berclair, TX. Interested parties were invited to
participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on
the proposal to the FAA. One comment was received supporting the
proposal. No response is provided.

Incorporation by Reference

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

The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR part 71 establishes Class E airspace
extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 7-mile radius
of Goliad NOLF, Berclair, TX.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

Environmental Review

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

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Amendment

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

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

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

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

* * * * *

ASW TX E5 Berclair, TX [Establish]

Goliad NOLF, TX
    (Lat 28[deg]36'42'' N, long 97[deg]36'45'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 7-mile radius of Goliad NOLF.
* * * * *

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on June 12, 2023.
Martin A. Skinner,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2023-12783 Filed 6-14-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: March 21, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 56)]
[Notices]
[Page 15244-15246]
[DOCID:fr21mr08-121]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-57500; File No. SR-MSRB-2008-02]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Municipal Securities Rulemaking
Board; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Amendment to
Rule A-3, on Membership on the Board, and Rule A-4, on Meetings of the
Board

March 14, 2008.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on March 5, 2008, the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (``MSRB''
or ``Board''), filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'' or ``SEC'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II and III below, which Items have been substantially prepared
by the MSRB. The MSRB has filed the proposal pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act,\3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(3) thereunder,\4\
which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission.
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.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The MSRB is filing with the Commission a proposed rule change
consisting of amendments to Rule A-3 to permit greater diversity in
considering persons to serve on the Nominating Committee or for Board
membership and amendments to Rule A-4 to permit the Chairman of the
Board to call a special meeting of the Board directly and more quickly,
but with unanimous consent. The text of the proposed rule change is
available on the MSRB's Web site (http://www.msrb.org), at the MSRB,
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 MSRB 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 MSRB 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 Board has been reviewing its Administrative Rules and by-laws
to ensure that they are consistent with current good corporate
governance practices. Among other things, Rule A-3, on membership on
the Board, directs the Board and the Nominating Committee to consider
the ``need'' to maintain broad geographic representation on the Board,
as well as diversity in the size and type of dealers represented, in
considering persons to serve on the Nominating Committee or for Board
membership.
    The Board has determined to modify this provision in the rule in
order to provide greater flexibility in the appointment of persons to
the Nominating Committee and the nomination of candidates to the Board.
This modification will facilitate the Board and Nominating Committee's
consideration of a broader range of factors for nomination and will
encourage consideration of well-qualified candidates with diverse
backgrounds, unique experience and complementary skills, together with
consideration of geographic representation and diversity in the size
and type of dealers represented. Further, the modification seeks to
prevent the artificial limiting of the field of qualified candidates by
permitting the Board and Nominating Committee to consider such broader
factors rather than to exclusively select candidates in order to
achieve diversity on a narrower set of parameters.
    Rule A-4, among other things, provides a process for calling
special meetings of the Board, including how the notice of the time and
place of the special meeting shall be provided to Board members. The
current provision requires the Secretary of the Board to call a meeting
at the request of the Chairman of the Board or at the request of not
less than three Board members. In addition, the rule provides that the
notice of the special meeting shall be mailed to each member not later
than the seventh calendar day preceding the date on which the meeting
is to be held. The rule provides for a three day notice period for
notice by telephone, e-mail or personal delivery.
    The Board has determined to modify this provision to clarify and
update its rules and bring them into line with modern practice. The
Board has modified the rule to enable the Chairman of the Board to call
a special meeting of the Board directly, without the assistance of the
Secretary of the Board. In addition, the Board has provided that
notices for the time and place of a special meeting shall be provided
to each member and the Secretary of the Board with three-day's advance
notice. Further, the modification permits the Board to waive such
advance notice by unanimous consent of all Board members attending such
meeting. The modification takes into consideration the realities of
modern communications and permits the Board to convene quickly, but
with unanimous consent, in the event of, among other things, a market
or other emergency.
2. Statutory Basis
    The MSRB believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 15B(b)(2)(I) of the Act,\5\ which authorizes the MSRB to adopt
rules that provide for the operation and administration of the MSRB.
The MSRB believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with this
provision because it is concerned solely with the operation and
administration of the MSRB.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-4(b)(2)(I).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The MSRB does not believe the proposed rule change will impose any
burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of
the purposes of the Act since it only applies to the operation and
administration of the MSRB.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    The proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \6\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(3) thereunder \7\ because
it is concerned solely with the operation and administration of the
MSRB. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission may summarily abrogate 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.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \7\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(3).
    \8\ See Section 19(b)(3)(C) of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-MSRB-2008-02 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-MSRB-2008-02. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/
sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be

available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public
Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official
business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the MSRB. All comments received will be posted
without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to
File Number SR-MSRB-2008-02 and should be submitted on or before April
11, 2008.

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

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

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-5704 Filed 3-20-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P