[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 8 (Monday, January 13, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2169-2170]
[FR Doc No: 2014-00389]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0780; FRL-9904-99]

Amendment of a Pesticide Experimental Use Permit; Notice of
Receipt of Application; Comment Request

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces EPA's receipt of an application from
Monsanto Company requesting to amend 524-EUP-104 experimental use
permit (EUP) for the plant-incorporated protectants (PIPs) corn event
MON 87411 in combination with single and combined traits against
lepidoptera and corn rootworm (CRW). The Agency has determined that the
amendment request for the permit may be of regional and national
significance. Therefore, because of the potential significance, and
pursuant to the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
(FIFRA), EPA is hereby providing notice of receipt and is seeking
comments on this application.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before February 12, 2014. Submit
your comments, identified by docket identification (ID) number and the
EUP File Symbol as shown in the body of this document, by one of the
following methods:

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number and the EUP File Symbol as shown in the body of this
document, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.htm.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert McNally, Biopesticides and
Pollution Prevention Division (BPPD), (7511P), Office of Pesticide
Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    This action is directed to the public in general. Although this
action may be of particular interest to those persons who conduct or
sponsor research on pesticides, the Agency has not attempted to
describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action.

B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked

will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in
40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
    3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to achieve environmental
justice, the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of any group,
including minority and/or low income populations, in the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies. To help address potential environmental justice issues, the
Agency seeks information on any groups or segments of the population
who, as a result of their location, cultural practices, or other
factors, may have atypical or disproportionately high and adverse human
health impacts or environmental effects from exposure to the
pesticide(s) discussed in this document, compared to the general
population.

II. What Action is the Agency Taking?

    Under section 5 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), 7 U.S.C. 136c, EPA can allow manufacturers to
field test pesticides under development. Manufacturers are required to
obtain an EUP before testing new pesticides or new uses of pesticides
if they conduct experimental field tests on 10 acres or more of land or
one acre or more of water. Following the review of the application and
any comments and data received in response to this solicitation, EPA
will decide whether to issue or deny the amended EUP request, and if
issued, the conditions under which it is to be conducted. Any issuance
of an amended EUP will be announced in the Federal Register.
    Therefore, pursuant to 40 CFR 172.11(a), the Agency has determined
that the following amended EUP application may be of regional and
national significance, and therefore is seeking public comment on the
following amended EUP application:
    524-EUP-104. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0780). On March 1, 2013, EPA approved
an application from Monsanto Company, 800 Lindbergh Blvd., St. Louis,
MO 63167, for an experimental use permit (EPA Reg. No. 524-EUP-104) for
the PIPs corn events MON 87410 and MON 87411. A notice of issuance of
the EUP was published in the Federal Register on November 21, 2013 (78
FR 69849) (FRL-9403-1) . The corn events MON 87410 and Mon 87411 were
approved for experimental use in combination with single and combined
traits that produce active ingredients derived from Bacillus
thuringiensis (Bt) and target lepidoptera and corn rootworm (CRW). The
EUP allowed planting through February 28, 2015.
    In a subsequent application, dated October 3, 2013, Monsanto has
proposed to amend this permit (524-EUP-104) to plant MON 87411 in
combination with other single- and combined-event PIPs that have been
previously registered. The acreage to be planted under the proposed
amendment over the 2-year period (2014-2016) are: 13,300 acres of event
combinations containing MON 87411, 7,032 acres of other unregistered
PIP combinations, 11,057 acres of registered PIPs to be used in
comparators, and 14,653 acres of non-PIP and border plants.
    The PIP events comprising the single or combined trait products in
this EUP include MON 89034, TC1507, MIR162, MON 88017, DAS-59122-7, and
MON 87411. The proposed new corn event, MON 87411, contains a
suppression cassette with an inverted repeat sequence (DvSnf7) derived
from Diabrotica virgifera. The expression of the DvSnf7 suppression
cassette results in the formation of a double stranded RNA (dsRNA)
transcript. The researchers postulate that when PIP-produced Dv49 dsRNA
is consumed by the pest, it down regulates the targeted pest's Snf7
gene, resulting in CRW mortality. MON 87411 also produces the Cry3Bb1
protein to protect against CRW larval feeding.
    The Bt proteins to be used in the single or combination traits in
the proposed amended EUP include Cry1A.105, Cry2Ab2, Cry IF, Vip3Aa20,
Cry3Bb1, and Cry34Abl/Cry35Abl. The environmental and human health
safety of these proteins has been demonstrated, and they are
respectively exempted from the requirement of a tolerance (40 CFR
174.502, 174.519, 174.520, 174.501, 174.518, 174.506). A permanent
tolerance exemption has been established for nucleic acids that are
part of the PIPs proposed for testing, including the dsRNA from MON
87411 (40 CFR 174.507).
    The tests will be conducted in the U.S. territory of Puerto Rico
and in the states including: Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado,
Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas,
Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri,
Nebraska, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania,
South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Washington and
Wisconsin.
    Proposed protocols for the EUP include: (1) Seed development and
increase for future testing including nursery observations of traits in
various genetic backgrounds; and (2) product characterization work,
including phenotypic and agronomic observations, efficacy, yield
benefit evaluations and regulatory data generation.

    Authority:  7 U.S.C. 136c.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Experimental use permits.

    Dated: December 30, 2013.
G. Jeffrey Herndon,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. 2014-00389 Filed 1-10-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 234 (Thursday, December 5, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73197-73199]
[FR Doc No: 2013-29079]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0823]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office
of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Over-the-Counter
Drugs; Labeling Requirements

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a
proposed collection of information has been submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

DATES: Fax written comments on the collection of information by January
6, 2014.

ADDRESSES: To ensure that comments on the information collection are
received, OMB recommends that written comments be faxed to the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer,
FAX:<PHONE_NUMBER>, or emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>All
comments should be identified with the OMB control number 0910-0340.
Also include the FDA docket number found in brackets in the heading of
this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FDA PRA Staff, Office of Operations,
Food and Drug Administration, 1350 Piccard Dr., PI50-400B, Rockville,
MD 20850<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has
submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for
review and clearance.

Over-the-Counter Drugs; Labeling Requirements--(OMB Control Number
0910-0340)--Extension

    In the Federal Register of March 17, 1999, (64 FR 13254) (the 1999
labeling final rule), we amended our regulations governing requirements
for human drug products to establish standardized format and content
requirements for the labeling of all marketed over-the-counter (OTC)
drug products in part 201 (21 CFR part 201). The regulations in part
201 require OTC drug product labeling to include uniform headings and
subheadings, presented in a standardized order, with minimum standards
for type size and other graphical features. Specifically, the 1999
labeling final rule added new Sec.  201.66 (21 CFR 201.66) to part 201.
Section 201.66 sets content and format requirements for the Drug Facts
portion of labels on OTC drug products.
    On June 20, 2000 (65 FR 38191), we published a Federal Register
final rule that required all OTC drug products marketed under the OTC
monograph system to comply with the labeling requirements in Sec.
201.66 by May 16, 2005, or sooner (65 FR 38191 at 38193). Currently
marketed OTC drug products are already required to be in compliance
with these labeling requirements, and thus will incur no further burden
to comply with Drug Facts labeling requirements in Sec.  201.66.
Modifications of labeling already required to be in Drug Facts format
are usual and customary as part of routine redesign practice, and thus
do not create additional burden within the meaning of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA). Therefore, the burden to comply with
the labeling requirements in Sec.  201.66 is a one-time burden
applicable only to new OTC drug products introduced to the marketplace
under new drug applications, abbreviated new drug applications, or an
OTC drug monograph, except for products in ``convenience size''
packages.\1\ New OTC drug products

must comply with the labeling requirements in Sec.  201.66 as they are
introduced to the marketplace.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In a final rule published in the Federal Register of April
5, 2002 (67 FR 16304), the Agency delayed the compliance dates for
the 1999 labeling final rule for all OTC drug products that: (1)
Contain no more than two doses of an OTC drug; and (2) because of
their limited available labeling space, would require more than 60
percent of the total surface area available to bear labeling to meet
the requirements set forth in Sec.  201.66(d)(1) and (d)(9) and,
therefore, qualify for the labeling modifications currently set
forth in Sec.  201.66(d)(10) (67 FR 16304 at 16306). The Agency
issued this delay in order to develop additional rulemaking for
these ``convenience size'' products (December 12, 2006; 71 FR
74474). These products are not currently subject to the requirements
of Sec.  201.66. PRA approval for any requirements to which they may
be subject in the future will be handled in a separate rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on a March 1, 2010, estimate provided by the Consumer
Healthcare Products Association (75 FR 49495 at 49496), we estimated
that approximately 900 new OTC drug product stock keeping units (SKUs)
are introduced to the marketplace each year. We estimated that these
SKUs are marketed by 300 manufacturers. We estimated that the
preparation of labeling for new OTC drug products would require 12
hours to prepare, complete, and review prior to submitting the new
labeling to us. Based on this estimate, the annual reporting burden for
this type of labeling is approximately 10,800 hours.
    OTC sunscreen products were previously not included in our
consideration of the burden to comply with the Drug Facts labeling
requirements in Sec.  201.66. We specifically exempted OTC sunscreen
products from complying with the 1999 labeling final rule until we
lifted the stay of the sunscreen final rule published in the Federal
Register of May 21,1999 (64 FR 27666). In the Federal Register of
December 31, 2001 (66 FR 67485), we stayed the 1999 sunscreen final
rule indefinitely. Additionally, in the Federal Register of September
3, 2004 (69 FR 53801), we delayed the Sec.  201.66 labeling
implementation date for OTC sunscreen products indefinitely, pending
future rulemaking to amend the substance of labeling for these
products. In the Federal Register of August 27, 2007 (72 FR 49070), we
proposed changes to labeling and related testing requirements for
sunscreen products to address both ultraviolet A and ultraviolet B
radiation, and we anticipated that sunscreen products would become
subject to Sec.  201.66 at the time any resultant final rule becomes
effective. In the Federal Register of June 17, 2011 (76 FR 35620), we
published a final rule that established testing and labeling
requirements for OTC sunscreen products. This 2011 final rule lifted
the delay of the Sec.  201.66 labeling implementation date for OTC
sunscreen product. The compliance dates for the 2011 final rule were
June 18, 2012, for sunscreen products with annual sales of $25,000 or
more and June 17, 2013, for sunscreen products with annual sales of
less than $25,000, but we later delayed these compliance dates to
December 17, 2012, and December 17, 2013, respectively, when we
published an extension date notice on May 11, 2012 (77 FR 27591).
    All currently marketed sunscreen products are, therefore, already
required to be in compliance with the Drug Facts labeling requirements
inSec.  201.66, and thus will incur no further burden under the
information collection provisions in the 1999 labeling final rule.
However, a new OTC sunscreen drug product, like any new OTC drug
product, will be subject to a one-time burden to comply with Drug Facts
labeling requirements in Sec.  201.66. We estimated that 60 new SKUs of
OTC sunscreen drug products would be marketed each year (77 FR 27234).
We estimated that these 60 SKUs would be marketed by 30 manufacturers.
We estimated that approximately 12 hours would be spent on each label,
based on the most recent estimate used for other OTC drug products to
comply with the 1999 Drug Facts labeling final rule, including public
comments received on this estimate in 2010 that addressed sunscreens.
    In determining the burden for Sec.  201.66, it is also important to
consider exemptions or deferrals of the regulation allowed products
under Sec.  201.66(e). Since publication of the 1999 labeling final
rule, we have received only one request for exemption or deferral. One
response over an 8-year period equates to an annual frequency of
response equal to 0.125. In the 1999 labeling final rule, we estimated
that a request for deferral or exemption would require 24 hours to
complete (64 FR 13254 at 13276). We continue to estimate that this type
of response will require approximately 24 hours. Multiplying the annual
frequency of response (0.125) by the number of hours per response (24)
gives a total response time for requesting exemption or deferral equal
to 3 hours.
    In the Federal Register of July 23, 2013 (78 FR 44124), FDA
published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed
collection of information. We received one comment in response to the
notice. The comment was a complaint about the ``deceptively large''
containers in which some OTC drug products are packaged. These
deceptively large containers mislead consumers into thinking that they
were purchasing more product than the package actually contained.
    We do not consider this comment relevant to this proposed
collection of information. This information collection concerns OTC
drug product labeling format and content, specifically the labeling
that appears within the Drug Facts panel. This comment is a complaint
about OTC drug products packaged in ``deceptively large'' containers,
which is a separate issue and is not the subject of this notice. The
regulations for Drug Facts labeling in Sec.  201.66 do not establish,
and were not intended to establish, container size requirements for OTC
drug products. The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act already
prohibits the use of deceptively large containers. According to 21
U.S.C. 352(i): ``A drug or device shall be deemed to be misbranded if
it is a drug and its container is so made, formed, or filled as to be
misleading.'' Therefore, the commenter's complaint is already addressed
by statute.
    FDA estimates the current burden of this collection of information
as follows:

                           Table 1--Estimated Annual Third-Party Disclosure Burden \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Number of
                                     Number of      disclosures    Total annual       Average
         21 CFR Section             respondents         per         disclosures     burden per      Total hours
                                                    respondent                      disclosure
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
201.66(c) and (d) for new OTC                300               3             900              12          10,800
 drug products..................
201.66(c) and (d) for new OTC                 20               3              60              12             720
 sunscreen products.............
201.66(e).......................               1           0.125           0.125              24               3
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............          11,523
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of
  information.

    Dated: November 29, 2013.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2013-29079 Filed 12-4-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


From:        Richard S Vickery<EMAIL_ADDRESS>To:        Bill Neuffer/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA
Cc:        John A Dege<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Date:        01/16/2012 09:48 PM
Subject:        DuPont Nitric Acid Plant NOx Data - Pascagoula

Bill,

Attached is data concerning NOx emissions from the DuPont Pascagoula nitric
acid plant. It is a small, single-pressure plant with SCR control.

Data concerning our Beaumont nitric acid plant is almost complete and I
should have it to you soon. It is a small, single-pressure plant with NSCR
control.

Please let me know if you have any questions or comments.

Regards,
Rick

(See attached file: DuPont-FCC Pascagoula NOx Emission Data rev1.xls)(See
attached file: Pascagoula Data Sheet.doc)(See attached file: Pascagoula NOx
test 2-22-2011.pdf)

==========================================
Richard S. Vickery, P.E.
Air Quality Consultant
DuPont Engineering Research and Technology (DuET)
DuPont Building - D12036-1
1007 Market Street
Wilmington, DE 19898
(302)774-9829
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
This communication is for use by the intended recipient and contains
information that may be Privileged, confidential or copyrighted under
applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby
formally notified that any use, copying or distribution of this e-mail,
in whole or in part, is strictly prohibited. Please notify the sender by
return e-mail and delete this e-mail from your system. Unless explicitly
and conspicuously designated as "E-Contract Intended", this e-mail does
not constitute a contract offer, a contract amendment, or an acceptance
of a contract offer. This e-mail does not constitute a consent to the
use of sender's contact information for direct marketing purposes or for
transfers of data to third parties.

Francais Deutsch Italiano  Espanol  Portugues  Japanese  Chinese  Korean

          http://www.DuPont.com/corp/email_disclaimer.html


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 10 (Tuesday, January 17, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 4965]
[FR Doc No: 2017-00828]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

[Docket No. PHMSA-2016-0154; Notice No. 2016-23]

Hazardous Materials: Information Collection Activities

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice and request for comments on Information Collection
Approvals.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
approval and extension for four Information Collection Requests (ICRs).
Specifically, this notice announces the following: OMB approval and
extension until February 28, 2018 for OMB Control No. 2137-0586,
``Hazardous Materials Public Sector Training & Planning Grants''; OMB
approval and extension until March 31, 2019 for OMB Control No. 2137-
0628, ``Flammable Hazardous Materials by Rail Transportation''; and OMB
approval and extension until June 30, 2019 for both OMB Control No.
2137-0613, ``Subsidiary Hazard Class and Number/Type of Packagings,''
and OMB Control No. 2137-0510, ``Radioactive (RAM) Transportation
Requirements.''

DATES: The expiration dates for the ICRs approved by OMB are February
28, 2018; March 31, 2019; or June 30, 2019, as indicated under the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this notice.

ADDRESSES: Requests for a copy of an information collection should be
directed to Steven Andrews or T. Glenn Foster, Office of Hazardous
Materials Standards (PHH-12), Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven Andrews or T. Glenn Foster,
Office of Hazardous Materials Standards (PHH-12), Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590-0001, Telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OMB regulations (5 CFR part 1320)
implementing provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L.
104-13) require that interested members of the public and affected
agencies have an opportunity to comment on information collection and
recordkeeping activities (see 5 CFR 1320.8(s)) and specify that no
person is required to respond to an information collection unless it
displays a valid OMB control number. In accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, PHMSA has received OMB approval for renewal of
the following ICRs:
    OMB Control Number: 2137-0586.
    Title: ``Hazardous Materials Public Sector Training & Planning
Grants.''
    Expiration Date: February 28, 2018.
    OMB Control Number: 2137-0628.
    Title: ``Flammable Hazardous Materials by Rail Transportation.''
    Expiration Date: March 31, 2019.
    OMB Control Number: 2137-0613.
    Title: ``Subsidiary Hazard Class and Number/Type of Packagings.''
    Expiration Date: June 30, 2019.
    OMB Control Number: 2137-0510.
    Title: ``Radioactive (RAM) Transportation Requirements.''
    Expiration Date: June 30, 2019.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on January 11, 2017.
William S. Schoonover,
Associate Administrator, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2017-00828 Filed 1-13-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-60-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 124 (Friday, June 27, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36576-36577]
[FR Doc No: 2014-14913]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0265]

Policy for Discontinuance of Certain Instrument Approach
Procedures

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of policy; disposition of comments.

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

SUMMARY: This action adopts with minor modification, the policy
proposed in the Federal Register on August 2, 2013. Under this policy,
the FAA establishes the criteria to identify certain non-directional
beacon (NDB) and very high frequency (VHF) omnidirectional radio range
(VOR) instrument approach procedures that can be considered for
cancellation. Additionally, the FAA responds to comments received
during the comment period on the notice of proposed policy.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions concerning this action,
contact Wayne Eckenrode, Aeronautical Navigation Products, AJV-3,
Instrument Flight Procedures Efficiency Group, Manager, Federal
Aviation Administration, Air Traffic Organization, 4500 Mercantile
Plaza Drive, Fort Worth, TX 76137; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Background

    Right-sizing the National Airspace System (NAS) is an integral part
of the FAA's commitment to deliver the benefits of the Next Generation
Air Transportation System (NextGen) through enhanced technology,
enhanced capabilities, and more efficient, streamlined services. Focus
on improvements in satellite-based navigation based on Global
Positioning System (GPS) technology has facilitated the implementation
of a large number of Performance Based Navigation (PBN) Instrument
Approach Procedures (IAPs) into the NAS. These PBN procedures charted
as RNAV (GPS) and RNAV (RNP) IAPs, improve the safety and efficiency of
the NAS by providing more precise, repeatable flight paths to the
runway. The total number of procedures in the NAS has nearly doubled
over the past decade, as legacy procedures based on older, ground-based
technology, are maintained alongside the newer, satellite-based
procedures. In some cases, the older procedures are redundant or
obsolete, and maintaining them unnecessarily increases FAA costs, as
well as creates the need for air traffic controllers to train and be
proficient on procedures that are not used or needed. Pilots must also
maintain proficiency on these procedures and, in some cases, memory
limitations in the Flight Management Systems (FMSs) in their aircraft
result in the inability to load all the data needed to support the
procedures. Removing certain redundant or underutilized IAPs will
increase the safety and efficiency of the NAS by streamlining user
access and FAA services, allowing the FAA to focus on delivering
greater benefits through new technology.
    In September 2010, the FAA awarded a grant to the Flight Safety
Foundation, to research and provide independent insight on how the FAA
should eliminate redundant or underutilized Instrument Approach
Procedures (IAPs). The Flight Safety Foundation's study and
recommendations were developed based on interviews and surveys of FAA
personnel, and key airspace stakeholders. Among those interviewed were,
Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA), Air Line Pilots
Association, International (ALPA), Air Transport Association (ATA),
National Business Aviation Association (NBAA), Regional Airline
Association (RAA), and the U.S. Air Force. The study formed the basis
for the notice of proposed policy and request for comment (78 FR 47048)
published in the Federal Register on August 2, 2013. The notice sought
comments on the proposed criteria the FAA would utilize to determine
which NDB and VOR IAPs could be considered for cancellation.

Summary of Comments

    The FAA received a total of 14 comments from individuals, the
Department of Defense (DoD), AOPA, the Maryland Aviation
Administration, the Wahoo Airport Authority, and SkyWest Airlines.
    Several of the comments received concerned the ability to train
pilots on NDB or VOR IAPs if the ground-based procedures at an airport
were cancelled. AOPA asserted that most flight instructors and pilots
rely very heavily on ground-based navigational aids for initial and
recurrent instrument flight training activities.
    This policy will not reduce the ability to train pilots on NDB or
VOR IAPs. Under this adopted policy, one existing ground-based IAP
procedure will remain at each airport under this policy.
    Three commenters were concerned with aircraft operations at an
airport during periods of inclement weather if the ground-based
procedure to a particular runway was cancelled. AOPA stated that
consideration needs to be given to the individual airport operation and
if there is a predominant or exclusive general aviation runway at a
particular airport, the procedure offering the lowest approach minimums
may not provide the greatest access. Based on this situation, AOPA
asserted that it may be necessary to preserve the IAP to the general
aviation runway for use during instrument training in visual
meteorological conditions.
    The criteria adopted in this notice ensure that an airport does not
lose IAP capability to any runway that already has a published IAP.
Additionally, the FAA will consider runway usage and local weather
conditions when identifying candidate IAPs for cancellation.
    Several commenters questioned whether the FAA will consider
community needs for goods and emergency services at certain locations
with limited access.
    The adopted criteria ensure that at least one RNAV IAP and one
ground based IAP will remain published at airports that already have
them.
    Individuals, AOPA, Wahoo Airport Authority, Maryland Aviation
Administration, and SkyWest Airlines, submitted general comments
concerning the decommissioning or discontinuance of NDBs and/or VORs.
    The decommissioning or discontinuance of NDBs or VORs is beyond the
scope of this action. The implementation of this policy will not
decommission or discontinue the use of any facility, including NDBs and
VORs. The purpose of this policy is to appropriately identify IAPs that
can be cancelled.
    The DoD commented that the FAA should explore additional methods to
reduce costs of maintaining IAPs. The DoD stated that other methods to
reduce costs may exist such as reducing the costs of flight checks
which form a significant portion of the IAP maintenance costs.
    The FAA will continue to examine ways to reduce operating costs
associated with the maintenance of IFPs including reduction in flight
check costs.
    Many commenters expressed concern with GPS signal interruption,
which emphasized, in their view, the need for redundant ground-based
IAPs.

Commenters also noted some geographic areas in the NAS incur GPS signal
interference more regularly than others due to U.S. Government testing.
    Under this policy, the FAA will ensure that at least one ground
based IAP will remain at each airport.
    The FAA agrees that the adopted criteria must also consider GPS
signal interference. Therefore, the FAA modifies this policy and adds
the following as a factor to be considered: ``Airports located within
an area routinely affected by GPS signal interference testing.''
    The DoD stated that if IAPs at a civil airport are extensively
utilized by military aircraft for training and/or proficiency, these
IAPs should be retained. Additionally, the DoD suggested that DoD
facilities should be added to the list of airports that are not
considered for NDB or VOR IAP cancellations.
    While this policy will not add DoD facilities to the list of
airports that are not considered for NDB and VOR IAP cancellation, the
FAA agrees to modify the policy so that IAPs used extensively by
military aircraft for training and/or proficiency will remain in the
National Airspace System.

Policy

    After review and evaluation of the public comments received on the
policy proposed in the Federal Register on August 2, 2013 (FAA-2013-
0265), the FAA adopts the criteria for selecting potential IAPs for
cancellation as proposed with two modifications based on the comments
received. FAA adds the following to the list of consideration factors:
``Airports located within an area routinely affected by GPS signal
interference testing'' and ``Extensive use by the military for training
and/or proficiency.''
    The NDB and VOR IAPs recommended for cancellation will be selected
at airports using the adopted criteria. FAA notes that all airports
having existing RNAV and ground-based IAPs will maintain at least one
RNAV and one ground-based IAP under this initiative.
    Instrument Approach Procedures are incorporated by reference into
Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations part 97, subpart C, and are
promulgated by rulemaking procedures. Once the FAA identifies IAPs that
may be cancelled in accordance with the adopted policy noted above, the
FAA will follow standard rulemaking procedures including a Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking in the Federal Register containing the list of NDB
and VOR IAPs recommended for cancellation. The FAA will consider all
public comments before issuing a Final Rule removing selected IAPs.
    Airports considered for NDB or VOR IAP cancellation:

--All airports with an NDB IAP.
--All airports with a VOR/DME RNAV IAP, unless it is the only IAP at
the airport.
--All airports with two or more ground-based IAPs and an RNAV IAP.
--All airports with multiple, redundant ground-based IAPs (e.g., three
VOR procedures).

    Additional factors for consideration in determining the list of
potential candidates for NDB or VOR IAP cancellation:

--Prevailing wind runways.
--Prevailing runway alignment during adverse weather operations.
--Runways with a published ILS IAP and a ground-based IAP.
--For runways with multiple VOR and NDB IAPs consider IAPs with the
lowest minimums (if minimums are within 20 feet of each other), and
IAPs that allow for optimum use by all users.
--Airports located within an area routinely affected by GPS signal
interference testing
--Extensive use by the military for training and/or proficiency.

    Airports not considered for NDB or VOR IAP cancellations:

--Airports with only RNAV/RNP IAPs published.
--Airports with only one ground-based procedure.
--Airports will not be considered if cancellation would result in
removing all IAPs from the airport.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on June 19, 2014.
Abigail Smith,
Director, Aeronautical Navigation Products.
[FR Doc. 2014-14913 Filed 6-26-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 23 (Friday, February 3, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 7429]
[FR Doc No: 2023-02254]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP22-495-000]

Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC; Notice To Prepare an
Environmental Assessment and Revised Schedule for Environmental Review
of the Texas to Louisiana Energy Pathway Project

    On August 9, 2022, Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC
(Transco) filed an application in Docket No. CP22-495-000 requesting a
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity pursuant to Section
7(c) of the Natural Gas Act to construct and operate certain natural
gas pipeline facilities. The proposed project is known as the Texas to
Louisiana Energy Pathway Project (Project), and includes construction
and operation of a new 15,900-horsepower compressor station in Fort
Bend County, Texas; modification of six existing compressors at
Compressor Station 40 in Hardin County, Texas; and programming updates
at existing Compressor Station 23 in Victoria County, Texas. The
Project purpose is to increase the firm capacity of Transco's system by
364,400 dekatherms per day (Dth/day). Transco would accomplish this
through the conversion of 130,000 Dth/day from Transco's ``IT Feeder
System'' to firm capacity, the ``turnback'' of certain firm
transportation capacity by customers of Transco, and incremental
capacity as a result of Project construction.
    On November 16, 2022, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(FERC or Commission) issued a Notice of Intent to Prepare an
Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Texas to Louisiana
Energy Pathway Project, Request for Comments on Environmental Issues,
Notice of Public Scoping Session, and Schedule for Environmental Review
(Notice of Intent) which identified November 30, 2023 as the issuance
date for the final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). However,
Commission staff now intends to prepare an Environmental Assessment
(EA) for the Project and has therefore revised the planned schedule for
the completion of the environmental review.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 40 CFR 1501.10 (2020)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The November 16, 2022 Notice of Intent announced the opening of a
30-day scoping period which closed on December 16, 2022. Commission
staff will consider the information gathered and comments received
during scoping in the preparation of the EA; interested stakeholders do
not need to resubmit comments previously submitted. Commission staff
will make the EA available for public review and inspection, and
solicit comments on the document from the public. The Commission will
review and consider any future comments received on the EA in its
consideration of the Project.
    This notice identifies the revised schedule for completion of the
EA for Transco's Project.

Schedule for Environmental Review

Issuance of the EA: June 9, 2023
90-day Federal Authorization Decision Deadline: \2\ September 7, 2023
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The Commission's deadline applies to the decisions of other
federal agencies, and state agencies acting under federally
delegated authority, that are responsible for federal
authorizations, permits, and other approvals necessary for proposed
projects under the Natural Gas Act. Per 18 CFR 157.22(a), the
Commission's deadline for other agency's decisions applies unless a
schedule is otherwise established by federal law.

    If a schedule change becomes necessary, an additional notice will
be provided so that the relevant agencies are kept informed of the
project's progress.

Additional Information

    In order to receive notification of the issuance of the EA and to
keep track of all formal issuances and submittals in specific dockets,
the Commission offers a free service called eSubscription. This can
reduce the amount of time you spend researching proceedings by
automatically providing you with notification of these filings,
document summaries, and direct links to the documents. Go to https://www.ferc.gov/ferc-online/overview to register for eSubscription.
    Additional information about the Project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs at (866) 208-FERC or on the
FERC website (www.ferc.gov). Using the ``eLibrary'' link, select
``General Search'' from the eLibrary menu, enter the selected date
range and ``Docket Number'' excluding the last three digits (i.e.,
CP22-495), and follow the instructions. For assistance with access to
eLibrary, the helpline can be reached at<PHONE_NUMBER>, TTY (202) 502-
8659, or at [email protected]. The eLibrary link on the FERC
website also provides access to the texts of formal documents issued by
the Commission, such as orders, notices, and rule makings.

    Dated: January 27, 2023.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-02254 Filed 2-2-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 95 (Thursday, May 16, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 28743-28744]
[FR Doc No: 2013-11613]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2012-0339]

Safety Zones; Fireworks Displays in the Sector Columbia River
Captain of the Port Zone Columbia River Zone

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of enforcement of regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce the safety zones listed in this
notice for fireworks displays in the Sector Columbia River Captain of
the Port Zone from May 2013 until October 2013. This action is
necessary to ensure the safety of the crews onboard the vessels
displaying the fireworks, the maritime public, and all other observers.
During the enforcement period for each specific safety zone, no person
or vessel may enter or remain in the safety zone without permission of
the Sector Columbia River Captain of the Port or his designated
representatives.

DATES: The regulations in 33 CFR 165.1315 will be enforced at the dates
and times listed in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this notice,
call or email Ensign Ian P. McPhillips, Waterways Management Division,
MSU Portland, Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard will enforce the safety zone
regulations in 33 CFR 165.1315 for fireworks displays in the Columbia
River Captain of the Port Zone during the dates and times listed below:
    (1) Cinco de Mayo Fireworks Display, Portland, OR: May 3, 2013 from
9:30 p.m. until 10 p.m.
    (2) Portland Rose Festival Fireworks Display, Portland OR: May 24,
2013, from 10 p.m. until 10:30 p.m.
    (3) Tri-City Chamber of Commerce Fireworks Display, Columbia Park,
Kennewick, WA: July 4, 2013, from 10 p.m. until 10:30 p.m.
    (4) Cedco Inc. Fireworks Display, North Bend, OR: July 3, 2013,
from 10:10 p.m. until 10:30 p.m.
    (5) Astoria 4th of July Fireworks, Astoria, OR: July 4, 2013, from
10 p.m. until 10:30 p.m.
    (6) Waterfront Blues Festival Fireworks, Portland, OR: July 4,
2013, from 10 p.m. until 10:30 p.m.
    (7) Oregon Symphony Concert Fireworks Display, Portland, OR: August
29, 2013, from 9:30 p.m. until 10 p.m.
    (8) Florence Chamber 4th of July Fireworks Display, Florence, OR:
July 4, 2013, from 10 p.m. until 10:30 p.m.
    (9) Oaks Parks July 4th Celebration, Portland, OR: July 4, 2013,
from 10 p.m. until 10:30 p.m.
    (10) Rainier Days Fireworks Celebration, Rainier, OR: July 13,
2013, from 10 p.m. until 10:30 p.m.
    (11) Ilwaco July 4th Committee Fireworks, Ilwaco, WA: July 6, 2013,
from 10 p.m. until 10:30 p.m.
    (12) Splash Aberdeen Waterfront Festival, Aberdeen, WA: July 4,
2013, from 9 p.m. until 11 p.m.
    (13) City of Coos Bay July 4th Celebration, Coos Bay, OR: July 4,
2013, from 10 p.m. until 10:30 p.m.
    (14) Arlington Chamber of Commerce Fireworks Display, Arlington,
OR: July 4, 2013, from 10 p.m. until 10:30 p.m.
    (15) Cascade Locks July 4th Fireworks Display, Portland, OR: July
4, 2013, from 10 p.m. until 10:30 p.m.
    (16) Astoria Regatta Association Fireworks Display, Astoria, OR:
August 10, 2013, from 10 p.m. until 10:30 p.m.
    (17) City of Washougal July 4th Fireworks Display, Washougal, WA:
July 4, 2013, from 10 p.m. until 10:30 p.m.
    (18) City of St. Helens 4th of July Fireworks Display, St. Helens,
OR: July 4, 2013, from 9:30 p.m. until 10:30 p.m.
    (19) Waverley Country Club 4th of July Fireworks Display,
Milwaukie, OR: July 4, 2013, from 10 p.m. until 10:30 p.m.
    (20) Hood River 4th of July, Hood River, OR: July 4, 2013, from 10
p.m. until 10:30 p.m.
    (21) Rufus 4th of July Fireworks, Rufus, OR: July 4, 2013, from
9:30 p.m. until 10:30 p.m.
    Under the provisions of 33 CFR 165.1315, 33 CFR 165.20, and 33 CFR
165.23, no person or vessel may enter or remain in the safety zones
without permission of the Captain of the Port Columbia River or his
designated representative. Persons or vessels wishing to enter the
safety zones may request permission to do so from the Captain of the
Port Columbia River or

his designated representative via VHF Channel 16 or 13. The Coast Guard
may be assisted by other Federal, State, or local enforcement agencies
in enforcing this regulation.
    This notice is issued under authority of 33 CFR 165.1315 and 5
U.S.C. 552(a). In addition to this notice in the Federal Register, the
Coast Guard will provide the maritime community with notification of
this enforcement period via the Local Notice to Mariners.

    Dated: April 30, 2013.
B.C. Jones,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Sector Columbia River.
[FR Doc. 2013-11613 Filed 5-15-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


Lead Paint Can Poison: Is Your Family at Risk?

HUD WANTS YOU TO LEARN THE FACTS ABOUT LEAD PAINT.

Q. Where is lead paint found? A. Most homes built before 1978 have some lead paint. Homes built before 1960 have the most lead paint. Lead can be present on any painted surface, but it is most often found on windows, trim, doors, railings, columns, porches and outside walls. Surfaces that have been repainted may have layers of lead paint underneath. A lead inspection can tell you where lead paint is located in your home.

Q. How do children get poisoned from lead paint? A. Most children are poisoned by invisible lead dust that is released when paint is peeling, damaged or disturbed. The dust settles on floors and other surfaces From there, it can easily get on children's hands or toys and into their mouths. Children can also be poisoned by playing in bare soil which can contain lead from paint that has peeled from outside walls, past use of leaded gasoline and other outside sources.

Q. Should I worry about lead if I repaint or remodel? A. Yes. Scraping, sanding or otherwise disturbing old paint can release large amounts of toxic lead dust. Learn to work safely with lead paint and make sure any contractor you hire follows lead safe guidelines. For more information, see HUD's fact sheet, Lead Paint Can Poison: Protect Your Family When You Repaint or Remodel. For a free copy, call 1 800 424 LEAD.

Q. How do I know if my child is lead poisoned? A. You cannot tell if a child is lead poisoned just by looking. The only way to find out is with a blood test. The test is simple, quick and available in a doctor's office or clinic. Most health plans cover lead tests. Young children who are enrolled in Medicaid and other state health programs can get free lead tests.

Q. What should I do if my child is lead poisoned? A. First, locate any lead hazards in your home and learn how to eliminate them safely. Talk with your doctor or health department about what else you can do to protect your child's health. Never try to remove lead paint yourself. Call 1 888 LEADLIST for a list of lead service providers.

Q. If I rent my home, how can I protect my family? A. There are five things you should know:

1. It is your landlord's job to keep paint in good shape.

2. If your landlord will not fix peeling paint or water damage, call your health department.

3. Make sure that workers who fix the paint do not spread lead dust.

4. Workers should clean up well before they leave.

5. Landlords are required by law to give you information about lead before you sign the lease and at any time your rent is raised.

USE HUD'S SIMPLE CHECKLIST ON THE REVERSE SIDE OF THIS FACT SHEET TO PROTECT YOUR FAMILY FROM LEAD PAINT HAZARDS. ° If your home was built before 1978, your child could be at risk for lead poisoning from lead paint.

° Lead can harm your child's brain, causing lifelong learning and behavior problems.

° Almost one million children under age six in the U. S. suffer from lead poisoning.

° Children under age six are most at risk. When a pregnant woman is exposed to lead, it can harm her unborn baby. U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development MAKE YOUR HOME A HEALTHY HOME!

Take these five steps:

1. Keep paint in good shape.

q Check often for peeling paint.

q Watch out for water damage that can make paint peel.

q Make sure any problems are fixed promptly.

2. Work safely with lead paint.

q Wet down the paint before you sand or scrape to control lead dust.

q Avoid creating dust or paint chips. A power sander or grinder should have a hood to trap dust and a HEPA vacuum attachment.

q Seal off the work area by covering floors, doors, windows and vents with heavy plastic and keep children and pregnant women away from the area.

q Cover furniture with heavy plastic or remove it from the work area.

q Wash floors and walls with soap and water.

q Dispose of trash and dust in plastic bags.

3. Keep your home free of lead dust.

q Clean floors and window sills often with soap and water and rinse with fresh water.

q Be sure children wash their hands before eating, after playing outside and at bedtime.

4. Watch where your children play.

q Don't let children play in bare soil.

q Look for areas with grass or other safe coverings.

5. Test your child for lead.

q Ask your doctor or health department if your child should be tested for lead.

HUD WANTS EVERY CHILD TO HAVE A LEAD SAFE HOME!

For HUD's fact sheet, Lead Paint Can Poison: Protect Your Family When You Repaint or Remodel, or for other information about making your home lead safe, call 1 800 424 LEAD.

For a free brochure on other home safety issues, call HUD's Healthy Homes hotline at 1 800 HUDS FHA or visit HUD's Web site at www. hud. gov. HUD is on your side.

Sponsored by the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development www. hud. gov


[Federal Register: August 29, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 167)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 49651-49654]
[DOCID:fr29au07-3]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0349; FRL-8142-1]

Spinosad; Pesticide Tolerance

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
spinosad in or on fish; fish-shellfish, mollusc; and fish-shellfish,
crustacean. Dow AgroSciences LLC requested these tolerances under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

DATES: This regulation is effective August 29, 2007. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before October 29, 2007,
and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40
CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES:  EPA has established a docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0349. To access the
electronic docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, select ``Advanced

Search,'' then ``Docket Search.'' Insert the docket ID number where
indicated and select the ``Submit'' button. Follow the instructions on
the regulations.gov web site to view the docket index or access
available documents. All documents in the docket are listed in

the docket index available in regulations.gov. Although listed in the
index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available in the electronic docket at http://www.regulations.gov, or,

if only available in hard copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in
Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg), 2777 S. Crystal Dr.,
Arlington, VA. The Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility
telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara Madden, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to those
engaged in the following activities:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111), e.g., agricultural
workers; greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture workers; farmers.
     Animal production (NAICS code 112), e.g., cattle ranchers
and farmers, dairy cattle farmers, livestock farmers.
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311), e.g., agricultural
workers; farmers; greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture workers;
ranchers; pesticide applicators.
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532), e.g.,
agricultural workers; commercial applicators; farmers; greenhouse,
nursery, and floriculture workers; residential users.
    This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather to
provide a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by
this action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also
be affected. The North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes have been provided to assist you and others in
determining whether this action might apply to certain entities. 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 Access Electronic Copies of this Document?

    In addition to accessing an electronic copy of this Federal
Register document through the electronic docket at http://www.regulations.gov
, you may access this Federal Register document

electronically through the EPA Internet under the ``Federal Register''
listings at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr. You may also access a

frequently updated electronic version of EPA's tolerance regulations at
40 CFR part 180 through the Government Printing Office's pilot e-CFR
site at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr.

C. Can I File an Objection or Hearing Request?

    Under section 408(g) of the FFDCA, any person may file an objection
to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a hearing on
those objections. You must file your objection or request a hearing on
this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR
part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0349 in the subject line on the first page of
your submission. All requests must be in writing, and must be mailed or
delivered to the Hearing Clerk as required by 40 CFR part 178 on or
before October 29, 2007.
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing that does not contain any CBI for inclusion in the public
docket that is described in ADDRESSES. Information not marked
confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA
without prior notice. Submit this copy, identified by docket ID number
EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0349, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.

Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Bldg), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only accepted
during the Docket's normal hours of operation (8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays). Special arrangements
should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The Docket Facility
telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

II. Petition for Tolerance

    In the Federal Register of May 9, 2007 (72 FR 26375) (FRL-8128-1),
EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408(d)(3) of the FFDCA, 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP
7F7191) by Dow AgroSciences LLC, 9330 Zionsville Rd., Indianapolis, IN
46268-1053. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.495 be amended by
establishing tolerances for residues of the insecticide spinosad in or
on fish; fish-shellfish, molluscs and fish-shellfish crustaceans at 4.0
parts per million (ppm). Spinosad is a fermentation product of
Saccharopolyspora spinosa, consisting of two related active
ingredients: Spinosyn A (Factor A; CAS 131929-60-7) or 2-[(6-
deoxy-2,3,4-tri-O -methyl-[alpha]-L-manno-pyranosyl)oxy]-13-[[5-
(dimethylamino)-tetrahydro-6-methyl-2H-pyran-2-yl]oxy]-9-ethyl-
2,3,3a,5a,5b,6,9,10,11,12,13,14,16a,16b-tetradecahydro-14-methyl-1H-as-
Indaceno[3,2-d]oxacyclododecin-7,15-dione; and Spinosyn D (Factor D;
CAS 131929-63-0) or 2-[(6-deoxy-2,3,4-tri-O-methyl-[alpha]-L-
manno-pyranosyl)oxy]-13-[[5-(dimethyl-amino)-tetrahydro-6-methyl-2H-
pyran-2-yl]oxy]-9-ethyl-2,3,3a,5a,5b,6,9,10,11,12,13,14,16a,16b-
tetradecahydro-4,14-methyl-1H-as-Indaceno[3,2-d]oxacyclododecin-7,15-
dione. That notice referenced a summary of the petition prepared by Dow
AgroSciences LLC, the registrant, which is available to the public in
the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received

in response to the notice of filing.

III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of the FFDCA allows EPA to establish a
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a
food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is
a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure.
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of the FFDCA requires EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the

pesticide chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure
that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to
infants and children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical
residue....'' These provisions were added to the FFDCA by the Food
Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996.
    Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), and the factors
specified in section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the available
scientific data and other relevant information in support of this
action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a
determination on aggregate exposure for the petitioned-for tolerances
for residues of spinosad on fish; fish-shellfish, crustacean; and fish-
shellfish, mollusc at 4.0 ppm. EPA's assessment of exposures and risks
associated with establishing the tolerance follows.
    On March 21, 2007 the Agency published a final rule (72 FR 13168
FRL-8114-4) establishing tolerances for residues of spinosad in or on
hop, dried cones at 22 ppm and amaranth, grain, stover at 10 ppm;
cattle, meat at 2.0 ppm; sheep, meat at 2.0 ppm; goat, meat at 2.0 ppm;
horse, meat at 2.0 ppm; poultry, meat at 0.10 ppm; cattle, fat at 50
ppm; sheep, fat at 50 ppm; goat, fat at 50 ppm; horse, fat at 50 ppm;
poultry, fat at 1.3 ppm; milk at 7.0 ppm; milk, fat at 85 ppm; egg at
0.30 ppm; cattle, meat byproducts, except liver at 5.0 ppm; sheep, meat
byproducts, except liver at 5.0 ppm; goat, meat byproducts, except
liver at 5.0 ppm; horse, meat byproducts, except liver at 5.0 ppm;
poultry meat byproducts at 0.10 ppm; cattle, liver at 10 ppm; sheep,
liver at 10 ppm; goat, liver at 10 ppm; and horse, liver at 10 ppm.
When the Agency conducted the risk assessments in support of this
tolerance action it assumed that spinosad residues would be present on
fish and shellfish (crustacean and mollusc) as well as on all foods
covered by the proposed and established tolerances. Residues on fish
and shellfish were included because there was a pending application
under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA),
7 U.S.C. 136 et seq., to register spinosad for aquatic use as a
mosquito larvacide, a use the Agency determined could result in
residues in fish and shellfish. Therefore, establishing the fish and
shellfish tolerances will not change the most recent estimated
aggregate risks resulting from use of spinosad, as discussed in the
Federal Register of March 21, 2007. Refer to the March 21, 2007 (72 FR
13168) Federal Register document, available at http://www.regulations.gov
, for a detailed discussion of the aggregate risk

assessments and determination of safety. EPA relies upon those risk
assessments and the findings made in the Federal Register document in
support of this action.
    Based on the risk assessments discussed in the final rule published
in the Federal Register of March 21, 2007 (72 FR 13168), EPA concludes
that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the
general population, and to infants and children from aggregate exposure
to spinosad residues.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    Adequate enforcement methodology (Liquid Chromatography/Mass
Spectroscopy - Accelerated Climate Prediction Initiative) is available
to enforce the tolerance expression. The method may be requested from:
Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701
Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755-5350; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
B. International Residue Limits

    There are no established or proposed CODEX Maximum Residue Limits
(MRLs) or Canadian or Mexican MRLs for residues of spinosad in or on
fish or shellfish.

V. Conclusion

    Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of spinosad,
consisting of the related active ingredients Spinosyn A, 2-[(6-deoxy-
2,3,4-tri-O-methyl-[alpha]-L-manno-pyranosyl)oxy]-13-[[5-
(dimethylamino)-tetrahydro-6-methyl-2H-pyran-2-yl]oxy]-9-ethyl-
2,3,3a,5a,5b,6,9,10,11,12,13,14,16a,16b-tetradecahydro-14-methyl-1H-as-
Indaceno[3,2-d]oxacyclododecin-7,15-dione; and Spinosyn D, 2-[(6-deoxy-
2,3,4-tri-O-methyl-[alpha]-L-manno-pyranosyl)oxy]-13-[[5-(dimethyl-
amino)-tetrahydro-6-methyl-2H-pyran-2-yl]oxy]-9-ethyl-
2,3,3a,5a,5b,6,9,10,11,12,13,14,16a,16b-tetradecahydro-4,14-methyl-1H-
as-Indaceno[3,2-d]oxacyclododecin-7,15-dione, in or on fish; fish-
shellfish, crustacean; and fish-shellfish, mollusc at 4.0 ppm.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This final rule establishes a tolerance under section 408(d) of
FFDCA in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and
Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this rule has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this rule is not
subject to Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355,
May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled Protection of Children
from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April
23, 1997). This final rule does not contain any information collections
subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq., nor does it require any special considerations
under Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under section 408(d) of FFDCA, such as the tolerance in
this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.) do not apply.
    This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this action
alter the relationships or distribution of power and responsibilities
established by Congress in the preemption provisions of section
408(n)(4) of FFDCA. As such, the Agency has determined that this action
will not have a substantial direct effect on States or tribal
governments, on the relationship between the National government and
the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government or between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined
that Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR 67249, November 6,
2000) do not apply to this rule. In addition, This rule does not impose
any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as described under
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Public Law
104-4).
    This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272
note).

VII. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to
the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report
containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the
United States prior to publication of this final rule in the Federal
Register. This final rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: August 17, 2007.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

0
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.

0
2. Section 180.495 is amended by alphabetically adding the following
commodities to the table in paragraph (a) to read as follows:

Sec.  180.495   Spinosad; tolerances for residues.

    (a) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Expiration/Revocation
          Commodity           Parts per million            Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                * * * * *
Fish........................                4.0                     None
Fish-shellfish, crustacean..                4.0                     None
Fish-shellfish, mollusc.....                4.0                     None
                                * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. E7-16897 Filed 8-28-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 177 (Thursday, September 12, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48206-48207]
[FR Doc No: 2019-19783]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received: Wing
Aviation, LLC; Correction

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

ACTION: Notice; correction.

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

SUMMARY: On September 5, 2019, the FAA published a notice in the
Federal Register containing a summary of a petition seeking relief from
specified requirements of Federal Aviation Regulations. 84 FR 46774.
This notice corrects the sections of the Code of Federal Regulations
from which the petitioner seeks relief.

DATES: Comments on this petition must identify the petition docket
number and must be received on or before September 20, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2018-0835
using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30; U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments
from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts
these comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to http://www.regulations.gov, as

described in the system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can
be reviewed at http://www.dot.gov/privacy.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140
of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nia Daniels,<PHONE_NUMBER>, Office of
Rulemaking, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue
SW, Washington, DC 20591.
    This notice is published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85. The purpose of
this notice is to improve the public's awareness of, and participation
in, the FAA's exemption process. Neither publication of this notice nor
the inclusion or omission of information in the summary is intended to
affect the legal status of the petition or its final disposition. This
notice corrects the sections of the Code of Federal Regulations from
which the petitioner seeks relief.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on September 9, 2019.
James M. Crotty,
Acting Executive Director, Office of Rulemaking.

Petition for Exemption

    Docket No.: FAA-2018-0835
    Petitioner: Wing Aviation, LLC
    Sections of 14 CFR Affected: Sec. Sec.  [thinsp]135.109(b);
135.243(b)(1); 135.337(b)(5) and (e); 135.338(b)(5); 135.339(e)(3) and
(4); 135.340(e)(3) and (4); and 135.341(b)(2), (3), and (4).
    Description of Relief Sought: Wing Aviation, LLC seeks an amendment
to its existing exemption to allow it to conduct part 135 air carrier
operations using small unmanned aircraft systems. This amendment would
enable Wing to train its personnel-pilots in command, visual observers,
and nest managers.

[FR Doc. 2019-19783 Filed 9-11-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 132 (Tuesday, July 10, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40699-40700]
[FR Doc No: 2012-16842]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee Teleconference on
Transport Airplane and Engine Issues

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of public teleconference.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces a public teleconference of the FAA's
Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC) to discuss transport
airplane and engine (TAE) issues.

DATES: The teleconference is scheduled for Wednesday, July 25, 2012,
starting at 10 a.m. Pacific Daylight Time. Arrange for oral
presentations by July 18, 2012.

ADDRESSES: FAA--Northwest Mountain Region, Fred Isaac conference room,
1601 Lind Ave. SW., Renton, WA 98057.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ralen Gao, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-
209, FAA, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591, Telephone
(202) 267-3168, Fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, or email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463; 5 U.S.C. app. III), notice is
given of an ARAC teleconference to be held July 25, 2012.
    The agenda for the teleconference includes discussion of Materials
Flammability Working Group Recommendations and a decision on whether to
forward the recommendation to the FAA.
    Attendance is open to the public, but will be limited to the
availability of teleconference lines. Participation will be by
teleconference only. Please confirm your participation with the person
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section no later than
July 18, 2012.
    To participate, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section by email or phone for the teleconference
call-in number and passcode. Anyone calling from outside the Renton,
WA, metropolitan area will be responsible for paying long-distance
charges.
    The public must make arrangements by July 18, 2012, to present oral
statements at the teleconference. Copies of the documents to be
presented to ARAC may be made available by contacting the person listed
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
    If you need assistance or require a reasonable accommodation for
the

meeting or meeting documents, please contact the person listed in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on July 5, 2012.
Lirio Liu,
Acting Director, Office of Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2012-16842 Filed 7-9-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 204 (Friday, October 21, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65555-65557]
[FR Doc No: 2011-27305]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-65583; File No. SR-ISE-2011-68]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange,
LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule
Change to Amend the Volume Threshold for Tier-Based Rebates for
Qualified Contingent Cross Orders and Solicitation Orders Executed on
the Exchange

October 18, 2011.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Exchange Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby
given that, on October 3, 2011, the International Securities Exchange,
LLC (the ``Exchange'' or the ``ISE'') filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as
described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared

by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The ISE is proposing to lower the threshold levels for tier-based
rebates for Qualified Contingent Cross (``QCC'') orders and
Solicitation orders. The text of the proposed rule change is available
on the Exchange's Web site (http://www.ise.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 these statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The self-regulatory organization
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 purpose of this proposed rule change is to lower the threshold
contract levels for tier-based rebates to encourage members to submit
greater numbers of QCC orders and Solicitation orders to the Exchange.
The Exchange currently provides a rebate to Members who reach a certain
volume threshold in QCC orders and/or Solicitation orders during a
month.\3\ Once a Member reaches the volume threshold, the Exchange
provides a rebate to that Member for all of its QCC and Solicitation
traded contracts for that month. The rebate is paid to the Member
entering a qualifying order, i.e., a QCC order and/or a Solicitation
order. The rebate applies to QCC orders and Solicitation orders in all
symbols traded on the Exchange. Additionally, the threshold levels are
based on the originating side so if, for example, a Member submits a
Solicitation order for 1,000 contracts, all 1,000 contracts are counted
to reach the established threshold even if the order is broken up and
executed with multiple counter parties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Exchange Act Release No. 65087 (August 10, 2011), 76 FR
50783 (August 16, 2011) (SR-ISE-2011-47).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The current volume threshold and corresponding rebate per contract
is:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Rebate
                  Originating Contract Sides                      per
                                                                Contract
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0-1,999,999..................................................      $0.00
2,000,000-3,499,999..........................................       0.03
3,500,000-3,999,999..........................................       0.05
4,000,000+...................................................       0.07
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange now proposes to lower the volume threshold levels to
attract additional order flow in QCC and Solicitation orders and make
it easier for more firms to reach the levels and receive the
corresponding rebate. The Exchange proposes to only lower the number of
contracts that Members need to reach in order to receive the rebate; no
change is proposed to the amount of rebate per contract. The proposed
lower volume threshold is:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Rebate
                  Originating Contract Sides                      per
                                                                Contract
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0-1,699,999..................................................      $0.00
1,700,000-2,499,999..........................................       0.03
2,500,000-3,499,999..........................................       0.05
3,500,000+...................................................       0.07
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, the Exchange currently assesses per contract transaction
charges and credits to market participants that add or remove liquidity
from the Exchange (``maker/taker fees'') in a select number of options
classes (the ``Select Symbols'').\4\ For Solicitation orders in the
Select Symbols, the Exchange currently provides a rebate of $0.15 to
contracts that do not trade with the contra order in the Solicited
Order Mechanism. The Exchange does not propose any change to that
rebate and that rebate will continue to apply.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Options classes subject to maker/taker fees are identified
by their ticker symbol on the Exchange's Schedule of Fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to amend its Schedule of
Fees is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Exchange Act \5\ in
general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Exchange
Act \6\ in particular, in that it is an equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees and other charges among Exchange Members. The
Exchange believes that the proposed fee change will generally allow the
Exchange and its Members to better compete for order flow and thus
enhance competition. Specifically, the Exchange believes that its
proposal to lower the volume threshold is reasonable as it will
encourage Members to direct their QCC and Solicitation orders to the
Exchange instead of sending this order flow to a competing exchange.
The Exchange notes that it currently has other incentive programs to
promote and encourage growth in specific business areas. For example,
the Exchange has lower fees (or no fees) for customer orders; \7\ and
tiered pricing that reduces rates for market makers based on the level
of business they bring to the Exchange.\8\ This proposed rule change
targets a particular segment in which the Exchange seeks to garnish
greater order flow. The Exchange further believes that the rebate
currently in place for QCC and Solicitation orders is reasonable
because it is designed to give Members who trade significant volume on
the Exchange a benefit by way of a lower transaction fee. As noted
above, once a Member reaches the proposed new threshold, all of the
trading activity in the specified order type by that Member will be
subject to the corresponding rebate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
    \7\ For example, the customer fee is $0.00 per contract for
products other than Singly Listed Indexes, Singly Listed ETFs and FX
Options. For Singly Listed Options, Singly Listed ETFs and FX
Options, the customer fee is $0.18 per contract. The Exchange also
currently has an incentive plan in place for certain specific FX
Options which has its own pricing. See ISE Schedule of Fees.
    \8\ The Exchange currently has a sliding scale fee structure
that ranges from $0.01 per contract to $0.18 per contract depending
on the level of volume a Member trades on the Exchange in a month.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also believes that its rebate program for QCC and
Solicitation orders is equitable because it would uniformly apply to
all Members engaged in QCC and Solicitation trading in all option
classes traded on the Exchange.

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

    The proposed rule change does not impose any burden on competition
that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of
the Exchange Act.

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

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any unsolicited written comments from members or other interested
parties.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Exchange Act.\9\ 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 Exchange Act. If the Commission takes such action, the
Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the
proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 Exchange 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-ISE-2011-68 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2011-68. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the 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-ISE-2011-68 and should be
submitted on or before November 14, 2011.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-27305 Filed 10-20-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 65 (Friday, April 4, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18906-18907]
[FR Doc No: 2014-07495]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP14-121-000]

Strom, Inc.; Notice of Petition for Declaratory Order

    Take notice that on March 24, 2014, Strom, Inc. pursuant to section
207(a)(2) of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission)
Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.207 (2013) filed a Petition
for Declaratory Order seeking to utilize a new portable LNG
liquefication technology (``LNG/B'') to convert Natural Gas purchased
from FERC regulated companies. The LNG will be utilized by U.S.
corporations and/or exported pursuant to Strom's export applications
submitted to the U.S. Department of Energy-Fossil Fuel Section, and in
accordance with section 3 of the NGA. Strom contends that since this is
a portable system and not a LNG terminal as defined by the NGA and not
a facility as defined by law, that no FERC permit is required. Strom
contends that any permit should be issued by the State Commission in
Florida and/or local jurisdictions. Strom also contends that it is a
third party marketer of a product regulated by FERC under the NGA.
    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 5 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 email
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on April 18, 2014.

    Dated: March 27, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-07495 Filed 4-3-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P