MCPB TASK FORCE

C.M. Schofield, Technical Chairman

8325 Old Deer Trail

Raleigh, North Carolina  27615

Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
December 2, 2008

Mr. James Parker

Special Review & Reregistration Division (7504P)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Room S-4900, One Potomac Yard

2777 South Crystal Drive

Arlington, VA  22202-4501

RE:  MCPB Generic Data Call-In:  Status of Studies – Time Extension
Request

Dear James:

This letter pertains to the status of three studies required in the
generic data call-in (DCI) for MCPB:

Oyster acute toxicity study (Guideline 850.1025);

Acute fish toxicity test (Guideline 850.1075); and

Fish early-life stage toxicity test (Guideline 850.1400)

In March 2008 the three studies identified were granted a time extension
until December 7, 2008.  This letter is to advise you that the MCPB Task
Force will be able to meet the December 7, 2008 deadline for supplying
data to EPA to satisfy oyster acute toxicity (850.1025) data
requirements but will need additional time for acute fish toxicity
(850.1075) and fish early-life stage toxicity (850.1400) data
requirements.

Initial study results for the acute fish toxicity test with sheepshead
minnow received from ABC Laboratories on 5 November 2008 demonstrated a
96-Hour NOEC of 35 mg a.e./L (acid equivalents/L) and a 96-Hour LC50 of
>35 mg a.e./L.  Upon receipt of the initial study results, we requested
that ABC conduct the study at higher concentrations in an attempt to
obtain a more accurate 96-Hour LC50 value.  The results of the repeat
study were received on 24 November 2008 and indicate 96-Hour NOEC and
96-Hour LC50 values of 47.1 and 62.2 mg a.e./L, respectively, based on
mean measured concentrations.  The draft report is in preparation but
will not be received until after the 7 December 2008 deadline.  While we
make every attempt to expedite review and finalization of the report, we
do not expect to be able to submit the final report until the end of
January 2009 and request an extension until that date.

The fish early-life stage toxicity test was contracted to Chemex
Environmental International Ltd in Cottenham, Cambridge UK.  The
laboratory has experienced repeated problems in obtaining eggs of
sufficient quality to conduct the study.  This has therefore resulted in
delay in initiation of the definitive study.  In our most recent
discussions with the laboratory they have indicated we should have a
draft report by February 2009.  Based on this schedule, we would expect
to finalize the study by the end of March 2009 with submission of the
final report in April.  We therefore request an extension until
mid-April 2009 for submission of the final report.

Should you have any questions or require any additional information,
please feel free to contact me at your convenience.

Sincerely,

C.M. Schofield

EPA Liaison, MCPB Task Force

CMS/ama

Page   PAGE  1  of   NUMPAGES  2     FILENAME \p  C:\Documents and
Settings\jparker2\Desktop\James's Stuff\james2\MCPB\MCPB Post phase
III\Acute fish & Fish Early Life DCI time extension request 12.03.08.doc


[Federal Register: May 23, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 99)]
[Notices]
[Page 29697-29698]
[DOCID:fr23my06-94]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-53819; File No. SR-NASD-2006-052]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Association of Securities
Dealers, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto to Reflect the Revised
Effective Date of Certain Amendments to NASD's Order Audit Trail System
Rules

May 17, 2006.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on April 20, 2006, the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.
(``NASD'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC''
or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I,
II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by NASD. NASD has
designated the proposed rule change as constituting a stated policy,
practice, or interpretation with respect to the meaning,
administration, or enforcement of an existing rule under Section
19(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(1) thereunder,\4\ which
renders the proposal effective upon receipt of this filing with the
Commission. The Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule
change on May 15, 2006.\5\ The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change, as amended, from
interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(i).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(1).
    \5\ In Amendment No. 1, NASD made certain technical and
clarifying changes to the rule text and throughout the proposed rule
change. For purposes of calculating the 60-day period within which
the Commission may summarily abrogate the proposed rule change under
Section 19(b)(3)(C) of the Act, the Commission considers the period
to commence on May 15, 2006, the date on which the Exchange filed
Amendment No. 1. See 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    NASD is proposing to establish July 10, 2006 as the effective date
of the amendments to NASD's Order Audit Trail System (``OATS'') rules
approved by the Commission on September 28, 2005 \6\ and March 30,
2006.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52521 (September 28,
2005), 70 FR 57909 (October 4, 2005) (SR-NASD-00-23). See also
Notice to Members 05-78 (November 2005).
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53580 (March 30,
2006), 71 FR 17529 (April 6, 2006) (SR-NASD-2006-040). See also
Notice to Members 06-15 (April 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Below is the text of the proposed rule change. Proposed new
language is in italics; proposed deletions are in [brackets].\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The proposed changes indicated below are based on rule text
approved by the SEC on September 28, 2005 and March 30, 2006, which,
but for this subsequent filing, would have become effective May 8,
2006. See supra notes 5 and 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
6950. Order Audit Trail System
* * * * *
6957. Effective Date
    The requirements of the Order Audit Trail System shall be effective
in accordance with the following schedule:
    (a) and (b) No Change.
    (c) Manual Orders
    The requirements of the Order Audit Trail System shall be effective
on July 10, 2006[six months after publication of the revised OATS
Reporting Technical Specifications relating to SR-NASD-00-23,] for all
manual orders, provided that firms shall be required to report
information item (18) specified in Rule 6954(b) only to the extent such
item is available to them.
    (d) No Change.
* * * * *
6958. Exemption to the Order Recording and Data Transmission
Requirements
    (a) through (b) No Change.
    (c) This Rule shall be in effect until July 10, 2011[May 8, 2011].
* * * * *

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

    In its filing with the Commission, NASD 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. NASD 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
    NASD is proposing to establish July 10, 2006 as the effective date
of the amendments to NASD's rules relating to OATS requirements
approved by the Commission on September 28, 2005 and March 30, 2006.
Specifically, on September 28, 2005, the SEC approved amendments to
NASD Rules 6950 through 6957 (``OATS Rules'').\9\ The amendments to the
OATS Rules: (1) Implement the OATS reporting requirements for manual
orders (``OATS Phase III''); (2) provide that members are required to
capture and report the time the order is received by the member from
the customer for all orders; (3) expand the order transmittal
requirements to include orders routed to a member's trading desk or
trading department; (4) exclude certain members from the definition of
``Reporting Member'' for those orders that meet specified conditions
and are recorded and reported to OATS by another member; and (5) permit
NASD to grant exemptive relief from the OATS reporting requirements in
certain circumstances to members that meet specified criteria.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 30, 2006, the SEC approved further amendments to the OATS
Rules

that expand NASD's OATS exemptive authority to include electronic
recording requirements.\10\ As amended, NASD has the authority to grant
exemptive relief from the OATS electronic recording and reporting
requirements for manual orders to members that meet specified criteria.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See supra note 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The current effective date of these amendments is May 8, 2006.
Since approval of these amendments, several firms and service bureaus
have requested that the effective date of the amended OATS requirements
be extended, noting the significant technological changes required to
implement the OATS requirements for manual orders in particular. NASD
understands the concerns raised and believes that extending the
effective date of the recent amendments to the OATS Rules until July
10, 2006 will greatly assist firms and service bureaus by providing
additional time to ensure that all the necessary system changes can be
tested and implemented, thereby helping to ensure the integrity and
accuracy of OATS data.
    Accordingly, NASD is proposing to establish July 10, 2006 as the
effective date of the amendments to NASD's OATS Rules approved by the
Commission on September 28, 2005 and March 30, 2006. In doing so, NASD
also is proposing amendments to NASD Rules 6957(c) and 6958(c) to
reflect the amended effective date.
    NASD has filed the proposed rule change for immediate
effectiveness. NASD announced the revised effective date in its Notice
to Members 06-17 (April 2006).
2. Statutory Basis
    NASD believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,\11\ which requires, among
other things, that NASD rules be designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest. NASD believes that extending the effective date of the
recent amendments to the OATS Rules will provide firms and service
bureaus more time to make necessary system changes to ensure compliance
with the amended OATS requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    NASD does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in
any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

    While NASD did not specifically solicit comment on the proposed
rule change, NASD received one written comment letter regarding certain
implementation issues and concerns.\12\ Specifically, the commenter
contends that release of the OATS Reporting Technical Specifications
and subsequent clarification from NASD staff regarding the OATS
reporting requirements highlighted new development requirements that
were not accounted for in their original implementation planning. As
such, the commenter requests that NASD extend the time for testing and
extend the compliance date for the amended OATS reporting requirements.
As described herein, NASD is proposing to extend the effective date of
the recent amendments to the OATS Rules to provide additional time for
firms and service bureaus to make necessary system changes to ensure
compliance with the amended OATS requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Letter from Financial Information Forum, on behalf of
FIF Service Bureau Committee, to Paul McKenney, NASD, dated March
29, 2006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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) of the Act \13\ and paragraph (f)(1) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\14\ in that the proposed rule change constitutes a stated
policy, practice, or interpretation with respect to the meaning,
administration, or enforcement of an existing rule of NASD. At any time
within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the
Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the
Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public
interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance
of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml.
); or     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-NASD-2006-052 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASD-2006-052. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all

written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of NASD. 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 No. SR-
NASD-2006-052 and should be submitted on or before June 13, 2006.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-7817 Filed 5-22-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 7 (Monday, January 12, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 1579]
[FR Doc No: 2015-00255]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments;
Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: Reduced
Vertical Separation Minimum

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA
invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) approval to renew an information
collection. The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment period
soliciting comments on the following collection of information was
published on November 6, 2014. Aircraft operators seeking operational
approval to conduct Reduced Vertical Separation Minimum (RVSM)
operations within the 48 contiguous United States (U.S.), Alaska and a
portion of the Gulf of Mexico must submit an application to the
Certificate Holding District Office.

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by February 11, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on
the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be
addressed to the attention of the Desk Officer, Department of
Transportation/FAA, and sent via electronic mail to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or faxed to<PHONE_NUMBER>, or mailed to
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management
and Budget, Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20503.
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of
this information collection, including (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for FAA's performance; (b) the
accuracy of the estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to enhance the
quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (d)
ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of
the collected information. The agency will summarize and/or include
your comments in the request for OMB's clearance of this information
collection.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathy DePaepe at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    OMB Control Number: 2120-0679.
    Title: Reduced Vertical Separation Minimum.
    Form Numbers: There are no FAA forms associated with this
collection.
    Type of Review: Renewal of an information collection.
    Background: The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment
period soliciting comments on the following collection of information
was published on November 6, 2014 (79 FR 66028). The authority to
collect data from aircraft operators seeking operational approval to
conduct RVSM operations is contained in part 91, Section 91.180.
Aircraft operators seeking operational approval to conduct RVSM
operations within the 48 contiguous States of the United States (U.S.),
Alaska and that portion of the Gulf of Mexico where the FAA provides
air traffic services must submit their application to the Certificate
Holding District Office (CHDO).
    Respondents: Approximately 1,560 operators.
    Frequency: Information is collected on occasion.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: 30 hours.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 46,800 hours.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on January 5, 2015.
Albert R. Spence,
FAA Assistant Information Collection Clearance Officer, IT Enterprises
Business Services Division, ASP-110.
[FR Doc. 2015-00255 Filed 1-9-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: August 16, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 158)]
[Notices]
[Page 47196]
[DOCID:fr16au06-66]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP06-200-009]

Rockies Express Pipeline LLC; Notice of Negotiated Rate

August 9, 2006.
    Take notice that on August 4, 2006, Rockies Express Pipeline LLC
(REX) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, the following
tariff sheets, to be effective August 7, 2006:

Fifth Revised Sheet No. 22.
Original Sheet No. 24.
Sheet Nos. 25-29.

    REX states that the filing is being made to reflect a negotiated-
rate contract with Williams Power Company, Inc.
    REX stated that a copy of this filing has been served upon all
parties to this proceeding, REX's customers, the Colorado Public
Utilities Commission and the Wyoming Public Service Commission.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of
Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210).
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

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

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

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-13371 Filed 8-15-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: May 15, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 95)]
[Notices]
[Page 28188]
[DOCID:fr15my08-111]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket Nos. FMCSA-99-5748, FMCSA-99-6156, FMCSA-99-6480, FMCSA-00-
7363, FMCSA-01-9258, FMCSA-03-16564, FMCSA-05-23238, FMCSA-06-23773]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Renewals; Vision

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of final disposition.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA, in an earlier notice, announced its decision to renew
the exemptions from the vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Regulations for 34 individuals. FMCSA has statutory authority to
exempt individuals from the vision requirement if the exemptions
granted will not compromise safety. The Agency has reviewed the
comments submitted in response to the previous announcement and
concluded that granting these exemptions will provide a level of safety
that will be equivalent to, or greater than, the level of safety
maintained without the exemptions for these commercial motor vehicle
(CMV) drivers.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Mary D. Gunnels, Director, Medical
Programs,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA, Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Room W64-224, Washington,
DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Electronic Access

    You may see all the comments online through the Federal Document
Management System (FDMS) at http://www.regulations.gov.

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption
for a 2-year period if it finds ``such exemption would likely achieve a
level of safety that is equivalent to, or greater than, the level that
would be achieved absent such exemption.'' The statute also allows the
Agency to renew exemptions at the end of the 2-year period. The notice
was published on March 5, 2008 (FR 73 11989), and the comment period
ended on April 4, 2008.

Discussion of Comments

    FMCSA received one comment in this proceeding. The comment was
considered and discussed below.
    Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety (Advocates) expressed
opposition to FMCSA's policy to grant exemptions from the FMCSR,
including the driver qualification standards. Specifically, Advocates:
(1) Objects to the manner in which FMCSA presents driver information to
the public and makes safety determinations; (2) objects to the Agency's
reliance on conclusions drawn from the vision waiver program; (3)
claims the Agency has misinterpreted statutory language on the granting
of exemptions (49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315); and finally (4) suggests
that a 1999 Supreme Court decision affects the legal validity of vision
exemptions.
    The issues raised by Advocates were addressed at length in 64 FR
51568 (September 23, 1999), 64 FR 66962 (November 30, 1999), 64 FR
69586 (December 13, 1999), 65 FR 159 (January 3, 2000), 65 FR 57230
(September 21, 2000), and 66 FR 13825 (March 7, 2001). We will not
address these points again here, but refer interested parties to those
earlier discussions.

Conclusion

    The Agency has not received any adverse evidence on any of these
drivers that indicates that safety is being compromised. Based upon its
evaluation of the 34 renewal applications, FMCSA renews the Federal
vision exemptions for Scott E. Ames, Otto J. Ammer, Jr., Nick D. Bacon,
Mark A. Baisden, Johnny W. Bradford, Lawrence M. Daley, Clifford H.
Dovel, Ray L. Emert, Arthur L. Fields, John W. Forgy, Daniel R. Franks,
Glenn E. Gee, Rupert G. Gilmore, III, Albert L. Gschwind, Walter R.
Hardiman, George A. Hoffman, III, Laurent G. Jacques, Michael W. Jones,
Matthew J. Konecki, Duane R. Krug, Paul E. Lindon, Jack D. Miller, Eric
M. Moats, Sr., Rick Moreno, Robert W. Nicks, Joseph S. Nix, IV., Monte
L. Purciful, George S. Rayson, Luis F. Saavedra, Gerald M. Smith,
Edward J. Sullivan, Steven Valley, Darel G. Wagner, and Bernard J.
Wood.
    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each renewal
exemption will be valid for 2 years unless revoked earlier by FMCSA.
    The exemption will be revoked if: (1) The person fails to comply
with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has
resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained before it was
granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not be consistent
with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136 and 31315.

    Issued on: May 6, 2008.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy and Program Development.
[FR Doc. E8-10825 Filed 5-14-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 98 (Friday, May 20, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30937-30938]
[FR Doc No: 2022-10793]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9872-01-R6]

Clean Air Act Operating Permit Program; Petitions for Objection
to State Operating Permit for ExxonMobil Fuels & Lubricant Company,
Baton Rouge Refinery, Reforming Complex and Utilities Units, East Baton
Rouge Parish, Louisiana

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of final Order on Petition for objection to Clean Air
Act title V operating permits.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator signed
an Order dated March 18, 2022, granting two title V permit Petitions
and resolving two related petitions filed by the Louisiana Bucket
Brigade, Earthjustice, Environmental Integrity Project, and Sierra Club
(the Petitioners). The Administrator granted the petition filed on
January 29, 2021 by Petitioners on title V permit 2261-V8 issued for
the Reformer Unit. This action also effectively resolves the
Petitioner's petition filed on May 11, 2020 for the same permit. In the
same action, the Administrator granted the petition filed on February
12, 2021 by Petitioners on title V permit 2363-V8 issued for the
Utilities Unit. This action also effectively resolves the Petitioner's
petition filed on March 27, 2020 filed on the same permit. The
Petitions requested that the EPA object to the Clean Air Act (CAA)
title V operating permits issued by the Louisiana Department of
Environmental Quality to ExxonMobil Fuels & Lubricant Company for its
Baton Rouge Refinery located in East Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana.

ADDRESSES: The EPA requests that you contact the individual listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to view copies of the final
Order, the Petition, and other supporting information. Out of an
abundance of caution for members of the public and our staff, the EPA
Region 6 office may be closed to the public to reduce the risk of
transmitting COVID-19. Please call or email the contact listed below if
you need alternative access to the final Order and Petition, which are
available electronically at: https://www.epa.gov/title-v-operating-permits/title-v-petition-database.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brad Toups, EPA Region 6 Office, Air
Permits Section,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The CAA affords EPA a 45-day period to
review and object to, as appropriate, operating permits proposed by
state permitting authorities under title V of the CAA. Section
505(b)(2) of the CAA authorizes any person to petition the EPA
Administrator to object to a title V operating permit within 60 days
after the expiration of the EPA's 45-day review period if the EPA has
not objected on its own initiative. Petitions must be based only on
objections to the permit that were raised with reasonable specificity
during the public comment period provided by the state, unless the
petitioner demonstrates that it was impracticable to raise these issues
during the comment period or unless the grounds for the issue arose
after this period.
    The EPA received a total of four Petitions filed by the Louisiana
Bucket Brigade, Earthjustice, Environmental Integrity Project, and
Sierra Club. Petitioners filed a Petition on May 11, 2020 which was
superseded by the filing of a second petition on January 29, 2021 on
title V permit 2261-V8 issued for the Reformer Unit. The
Administrator's action granted the Petitioner's Reformer Unit petition
filed January 29, 2021 and effectively resolves the superseded petition
filed on May 11, 2020 for the same permit. Similarly, Petitioners filed
a petition on March 27, 2020 which was superseded by the filing of a
second petition on February 12, 2021 on title V permit 2363-V8 issued
for the Utilities Unit. The same Administrator's action granted the
Petitioner's Utility Unit petition filed February 12, 2021 and
effectively resolves the superseded petition filed on March 27, 2020
for the same permit.
    The Petitioners made five claims in their Petition on the Reformer
Permit. The claims were related to volatile organic compound (VOC)
emissions monitoring, justification for such monitoring, changing of
VOC emissions factors without adequate permit modification, and that
the permit failed to ensure compliance with 40 CFR part

68, Chemical Accident Prevention Provision requirements. The
Petitioners also made three claims in the Petition on the Utilities
Permit consisting of inadequate monitoring and estimation of VOC
emissions from the wastewater system, inadequate monitoring and
emissions calculations of particulate matter (PM) emissions from the
cooling towers, and an inadequate reasoned explanation for why the
proposed permit ensures compliance with the VOC and PM limits at issue.
    On March 18, 2022, the EPA Administrator issued an Order granting
all claims to both permits in the respective Petitions. The Order
explains the basis for EPA's decision.

    Dated: May 16, 2022.
David Garcia,
Director, Air and Radiation Division, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2022-10793 Filed 5-19-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 121 (Tuesday, June 24, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35751-35752]
[FR Doc No: 2014-14680]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OA-2010-0757; FRL-9912-74-OARM]

Proposed Information Collection Request; Comment Request;
Confidential Financial Disclosure Form for Special Government Employees
Serving on Federal Advisory Committees at the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (Renewal); EPA ICR No. 2260.04, OMB Control No. 2090-
0029

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency is planning to submit an
information collection request (ICR), ``Confidential Financial
Disclosure Form for Special Government Employees Serving on Federal
Advisory Committees at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(Renewal)'' (EPA ICR No. 2260.05, OMB Control No. 2090-0029) to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in
accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
Before doing so, EPA is soliciting public comments on specific aspects
of the proposed information collection as described below. This is a
proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through
August 31, 2014. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is
not required to respond to a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before August 25, 2014.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OA-
2010-0757, online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), by
email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to: EPA Docket Center,
Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T,

1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Megan Moreau, Office of Diversity,
Advisory Committee Management and Outreach, Office of Administration
and Resources Management, Mail Code 1601M, Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents which explain in detail
the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the
public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA is soliciting
comments and information to enable it to: (i) Evaluate whether the
proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility; (ii) evaluate the accuracy of
the Agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of
information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions
used; (iii) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (iv) minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who are to respond, including
through the use of appropriate automated electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection techniques or other forms of information
technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. EPA
will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as appropriate.
The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for review and
approval. At that time, EPA will issue another Federal Register notice
to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to
submit additional comments to OMB.
    Abstract: The purpose of this information collection request is to
assist EPA in selecting federal advisory committee members who will be
appointed as Special Government Employees (SGEs), mostly to EPA's
scientific and technical committees. To select SGE members as
efficiently and cost effectively as possible, the Agency needs to
evaluate potential conflicts of interest before a candidate is hired as
an SGE and appointed as a member to a committee by EPA's Administrator
or Deputy Administrator.
    Agency officials developed the ``Confidential Financial Disclosure
Form for Special Government Employees Serving on Federal Advisory
Committees at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,'' also referred
to as Form 3110-48, for greater inclusion of information to discover
any potential conflicts of interest as recommended by the Government
Accountability Office.
    Form Numbers: EPA Form 3110-48.
    Respondents/affected entities: Entities potentially affected by
this action are approximately 250 candidates for membership as SGEs on
EPA federal advisory committees. SGEs are required to file a
confidential financial disclosure report (Form 3110-48) when first
appointed to serve on EPA advisory committees, and then annually
thereafter. Committee members may also be required to update the
confidential form before each meeting while they serve as SGEs.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Required in order to serve as a
SGE on an EPA federal advisory committee (5 CFR 2634.903).
    Estimated number of respondents: 250 (total).
    Frequency of response: Annual.
    Total estimated burden: 250 hours per year (1 hour per respondent).
Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).
    Total estimated cost: $22,000 (per year). There are no capital
investment or maintenance and operational costs.
    Changes in Estimates: The estimated number of respondents and
hourly labor costs have been reduced resulting in a lower total
estimated respondent burden compared with the ICR currently approved by
OMB.

    Dated: June 9, 2014.
Craig E. Hooks,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Administration and Resources
Management.
[FR Doc. 2014-14680 Filed 6-23-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


April 29, 2003 Donald R. Lynam Vice President, Air Conservation Ethyl Corporation 330 South Fourth Street Richmond, VA 23219 4304 Dear Dr. Lynam,

On February 28, 2003, you submitted to the Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA), on behalf of Ethyl Corporation ( Ethyl), a peer reviewed draft study report entitled: " Pharmacokinetics of Inhaled Manganese Sulfate in Pregnant and Lactating CD Rats," ( CIIT Protocol 01003). This pharmacokinetics ( PK) study is part of the requirements finalized in the notification letter received by Ethyl on May 25, 2000. As you know, the notification letter requires that EPA provide comments on peer reviewed draft study reports. Also, on April 2, 2003, on behalf of Ethyl, you requested amendments to the study protocol entitled, " Pharmacokinetics of Manganese Sulfate in Juvenile Male Rhesus Monkeys following sub chronic ( 13 week) Inhalation Exposure," ( CIIT Protocol 02005). This letter addresses both of these issues.

Regarding the peer reviewed draft study report on the PK study in pregnant and lactating rats, the conclusions presented seem to be supported by the results of the study. Additionally, the study report adequately addresses the peer reviewer concerns and we have no additional comments.

Regarding your April 2, 2003, letter, you requested two major amendments, as well as four other minor amendments, for the PK study in rhesus monkeys, CIIT Protocol 02005. First, you requested a three month extension to the required schedule for submission to the Agency of the draft final peer reviewed report for this study. Since this study is complex in nature, and involves peer review by the Technical Advisory Panel ( TAP), we believe your request for a three month extension to the required schedule for this study is reasonable, and is therefore granted.  2

Second, you requested an amendment to the protocol to allow for the addition of magnetic resonance imaging ( MRI) to the PK study in rhesus monkeys, CIIT Protocol 02005. The Agency supports these additional MRI evaluations of primates in this study, and believes the inclusion of MRI will add substantial value to this study.

The four other amendments requested in your April 2, 2003, letter include storage and use of manganese sulfate at room temperature which would adhere to updated labeling and Material Safety Data Sheet information; the collection of additional drinking water samples; the measurement of body weights whenever possible, rather than as originally specified due to problems in moving the animals to transfer cages; and the addition of trachea and larynx tissue collection during necropsy. We believe these requested changes will not significantly impact the goals of the study and through this letter we also approve these four protocol amendment requests.

We look forward to Ethyl's submission of the final PK study report in pregnant and lactating rats, as well as Ethyl's completion of the PK study in rhesus monkeys. If you have any questions concerning our review, please contact Joe Sopata of my staff at ( 202) 564 9034.

Sincerely,

/ s/

Suzanne Rudzinski Director Transportation and Regional Programs Division cc: Monica Alvarez, ORD/ OSP J. Michael Davis, ORD/ NCEA Stan Durkee, ORD/ OSP Hal Zenick, ORD/ NHEERL William Russo, ORD/ NHEERL Tim Backstrom, OGC Kevin Fast, Hunton & Williams


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 225 (Monday, November 23, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 72975-72976]
[FR Doc No: 2015-29636]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2015-D-4021]

Over-the-Counter Sunscreens: Safety and Effectiveness Data; Draft
Guidance for Industry; Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing
the availability of a draft guidance for industry entitled ``Over-the-
Counter Sunscreens: Safety and Effectiveness Data.'' This draft
guidance addresses FDA's current thinking about the safety and
effectiveness data needed to determine whether a nonprescription
sunscreen active ingredient or combination of active ingredients
evaluated under the Sunscreen Innovation Act (SIA) is generally
recognized as safe and effective (GRASE) and not misbranded when used
under specified conditions. The guidance also addresses FDA's current
thinking about an approach to safety-related final formulation testing
that it anticipates adopting in the future.

DATES: Although you can comment on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR
10.115(g)(5)), to ensure that the Agency considers your comment on this
draft guidance before it begins work on the final version of the
guidance, submit either electronic or written comments on the draft
guidance by January 22, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments as follows:

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to http://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on http://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Division of
Dockets Management, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2015-D-4021 for``Over-the-Counter Sunscreens: Safety and
Effectiveness Data; Draft Guidance for Industry; Availability.''
Received comments will be placed in the docket and, except for those
submitted as ``Confidential Submissions,'' publicly viewable at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Division of Dockets Management between 9
a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on http://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Division of Dockets Management. If you do not
wish your name and contact information to be made publicly available,
you can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body
of your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not
be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other
applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of
comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or
access the information at: http://www.fda.gov/regulatoryinformation/dockets/default.htm.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Division of Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers
Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
    Submit written requests for single copies of the draft guidance to
the Division of Drug Information, Center for Drug Evaluation and
Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10001 New Hampshire Ave.,
Hillandale Building, 4th Floor, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Send one
self-addressed adhesive label to assist that office in processing your
requests. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for electronic
access to the draft guidance document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kristen Hardin, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 22, Rm. 5443, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 240-
402-4246.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    FDA is announcing the availability of a draft guidance for industry
entitled ``Over-the-Counter Sunscreens: Safety and Effectiveness
Data.'' This draft guidance addresses FDA's current thinking regarding
the safety and effectiveness data needed to determine whether a
nonprescription sunscreen active ingredient or combination of active
ingredients evaluated under the SIA is GRASE and not misbranded when
used under specified conditions. The guidance also addresses FDA's
current thinking about an approach to safety-related final formulation
testing that it anticipates adopting in the future.
    FDA is issuing this guidance in partial implementation of the SIA
(Pub. L. 113-195), enacted November 26, 2014, which amended the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act). Among other things, the
SIA established new procedures and review time lines for FDA to
determine whether a nonprescription sunscreen active ingredient or
combination of active ingredients is GRASE and not misbranded when used
under the conditions specified in a final sunscreen order (GRASE
determination) (21 U.S.C. 360fff-1, -2, and -3). The SIA also directed
FDA to issue four guidances on various topics, including this guidance
(21 U.S.C. 360ffff-4). Many of the safety topics addressed in this
guidance were discussed at a public Nonprescription Drug Advisory
Committee meeting held September 4 and 5, 2014 (http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMaterials/Drugs/NonprescriptionDrugsAdvisoryCommittee/ucm380890.htm).
    This draft guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good
guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The draft guidance, when
finalized, will represent the current thinking of FDA on ``Over-the-
Counter Sunscreens: Safety and Effectiveness Data; Draft Guidance for
Industry; Availability.'' It does not establish any rights for any
person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an
alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable
statutes and regulations.

II. The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This guidance contains collections of information that are exempt
from the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
Section 586D(a)(1)(C) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360fff-4(a)(1)(C)) as
amended by the SIA states that the PRA shall not apply to collections
of information made for purposes of guidance under that subsection.

III. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the Internet may obtain the draft guidance
at either http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm or http://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: November 16, 2015.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015-29636 Filed 11-20-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register: October 30, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 209)]
[Notices]
[Page 63317-63318]
[DOCID:fr30oc06-88]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER06-615-002]

California Independent System Operator Corporation; Notice of
Technical Conference

October 24, 2006.
    Take notice that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission will host
a technical conference on Thursday and Friday, December 14-15, 2006 to
address issues related to the California Independent System Operator
Corporation's (CAISO) electric tariff, which reflects the Market
Redesign and Technology Upgrade (MRTU). The conference will be held at
the Biltmore Hotel at 2400 East Missouri in Phoenix, Arizona. The
conference is scheduled for Thursday, December 14 from 1 to 5 p.m. and
Friday, December 15, from 8:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. Mountain Standard
Time. Commissioners will attend, and the conference is open to the
public.
    The purpose of the technical conference is to assist the CAISO and
parties outside the CAISO Control Area to identify alleged seams issues
that require resolution, in accordance with the directive of the
Commission's September 21, 2006 order conditionally accepting the
CAISO's proposed MRTU electric tariff.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Cal. Indep. Sys. Operator Corp., 116 FERC ] 61,274 at P
490 (2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The technical conference will be a forum for participants to
identify specific alleged seams issues they will face upon MRTU
implementation and to offer solutions to remedy those seams.
Participants should be prepared to discuss technical and operational
issues. Participants are encouraged to file comments with the
Commission on or before November 15, 2006 that identify specific
alleged operational seams issues (particularly quantitative examples)
and possible solutions for discussion at the conference. These comments
should be filed in Docket No. ER06-615-002.
    The Commission is now soliciting nominations for speakers at the
technical conference. Persons wishing to nominate themselves as
speakers should do so using this electronic link: https://www.ferc.gov/whats-new/registration/caiso-12-14-speaker-form.asp.
 Such nominations

must be made before the close of business, Thursday, November 9, 2006,
so that an agenda for the technical conference can be drafted and
published.

    All interested persons may attend the conference, and registration
is not a strict requirement. However, in-person attendees are
encouraged to register on-line at https://www.ferc.gov/whats-new/registration/caiso-12-14-form.asp
 by close of business on Thursday,

November 30, 2006.
    For more information about the conference, please contact Sarah
McKinley at<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-18136 Filed 10-27-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 88 (Monday, May 8, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 29580-29582]
[FR Doc No: 2023-08802]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2023-1014; Airspace Docket No. 23-ACE-2]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of VOR Federal Airways V-14 and V-67, and Area
Navigation Route T-272; Vandalia, IL

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend Very High Frequency (VHF)
Omnidirectional Range (VOR) Federal airways V-14 and V-67, and United
States Area Navigation (RNAV) route T-272. The FAA is proposing this
action due to the planned decommissioning of the VOR portion of the
Vandalia, IL (VLA), VOR/Distance Measuring Equipment (VOR/DME)
navigational aid (NAVAID). The Vandalia VOR is being decommissioned in
support of the FAA's VOR Minimum Operational Network (MON) program.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 22, 2023.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by FAA Docket No. FAA-2023-1014 and
Airspace Docket No. 23-ACE-2 using any of the following methods:
    * Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to www.regulations.gov and follow
the online instructions for sending your comments electronically.
    * Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30, U.S. Department
of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W12-140, West
Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    * Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket Operations in
Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
    * Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
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.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11G, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points,
and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. You may also contact the Rules and
Regulations Group, Office of Policy, Federal Aviation Administration,
800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Colby Abbott, Rules and Regulations
Group, Office of Policy, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the
efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority as it would modify the National Airspace System (NAS) as
necessary to preserve the safe and efficient flow of air traffic.

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites interested persons to participate in this
rulemaking by submitting written comments, data, or views. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal. The most
helpful comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain
the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. To
ensure the docket does not contain duplicate comments, commenters
should submit only one time if comments are filed

electronically, or commenters should send only one copy of written
comments if comments are filed in writing.
    The FAA will file in the docket all comments it receives, as well
as a report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA
personnel concerning this proposed rulemaking. Before acting on this
proposal, the FAA will consider all comments it receives on or before
the closing date for comments. The FAA will consider comments filed
after the comment period has closed if it is possible to do so without
incurring expense or delay. The FAA may change this proposal in light
of the comments it receives.
    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 www.regulations.gov, as described in the system
of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.dot.gov/privacy.

Availability of Rulemaking Documents

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
internet at www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's web page at
www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Operations office (see ADDRESSES section for address, phone number, and
hours of operations). An informal docket may also be examined during
normal business hours at the office of the Operations Support Group,
Central Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, 10101 Hillwood
Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177.

Incorporation by Reference

    VOR Federal airways are published in paragraph 6010(a) and United
States Area Navigation Routes (T-routes) are published in paragraph
6011 of FAA Order JO 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 on an annual
basis. This document proposes to amend the current version of that
order, FAA Order JO 7400.11G, dated August 19, 2022, and effective
September 15, 2022. These updates would be published in the next update
to FAA Order JO 7400.11. That order is publicly available as listed in
the ADDRESSES section of this document.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11G lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas,
air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

Background

    The FAA is planning to decommission the VOR portion of the
Vandalia, IL, VOR/DME in January 2024. The Vandalia VOR is one of the
candidate VORs identified for discontinuance by the FAA's VOR MON
program and listed in the Final policy statement notice, ``Provision of
Navigation Services for the Next Generation Air Transportation System
(NextGen) Transition to Performance-Based Navigation (PBN) (Plan for
Establishing a VOR Minimum Operational Network),'' published in the
Federal Register on July 26, 2016 (81 FR 48694), Docket No. FAA-2011-
1082.
    Although the VOR portion of the Vandalia VOR/DME is planned for
decommissioning, the co-located DME portion of the NAVAID is being
retained to support current and future NextGen PBN flight procedure
requirements.
    The Air Traffic Service (ATS) routes affected by the planned
decommissioning of the VOR portion of the Vandalia VOR/DME are VOR
Federal airways V-14 and V-67, and RNAV route T-272. With the planned
decommissioning of the Vandalia VOR, the remaining ground-based NAVAID
coverage in the area is insufficient to enable the continuity of the
affected ATS routes. As such, proposed modifications to V-14 would
result in an additional gap in the airway between St. Louis, MO, and
Terre Haute, IN, and to V-67 would result in the airway being shortened
to begin in the Springfield, IL, area. Additionally, proposed
modification to T-272 would result in retaining the route by changing
the Vandalia VOR/DME route point with the TYMME waypoint (WP).
    To address the affected ATS route proposed amendments, instrument
flight rules (IFR) traffic could use portions of adjacent VOR Federal
airways V-4, V-12, V-50, V-52, and V-69 for conventional navigation or
RNAV routes T-272, T-301, and T-305 for GPS equipped aircraft.
Additionally, pilots equipped with RNAV capabilities could also
navigate point to point using the existing NAVAIDs, fixes, and WPs that
would remain in place to support continued operations through the
affected area. IFR aircraft may also receive air traffic control (ATC)
radar vectors to fly around or through the affected area, upon request.
Visual flight rules (VFR) pilots who elect to navigate via the affected
VOR Federal airways could also take advantage of the adjacent airways
or ATC services listed previously.

The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to 14 CFR part 71 to amend VOR
Federal airways V-14 and V-67, and RNAV route T-272 due to the planned
decommissioning of the VOR portion of the Vandalia, IL, VOR/DME. The
proposed airway actions are described below.
    V-14: V-14 currently extends between the Chisum, NM, VOR/Tactical
Air Navigation (VORTAC) and the Tulsa, OK, VORTAC; and between the
Springfield, MO, VORTAC and the Flag City, OH, VORTAC. The FAA proposes
to remove the airway segment between the St. Louis, MO, VORTAC and the
Terre Haute, IN, VORTAC. As amended, the airway would be changed to
extend between the Chisum VORTAC and the Tulsa VORTAC, between the
Springfield VORTAC and the St. Louis VORTAC, and between the Terre
Haute VORTAC and the Flag City VORTAC.
    V-67: V-67 currently extends between the intersection of the
Centralia, IL, VORTAC 010[deg] and Vandalia, IL, VOR/DME 162[deg]
radials (CORKI Fix) and the Rochester, MN, VOR/DME. The FAA proposes to
remove the airway segment between the intersection of the Centralia
VORTAC 010[deg] and Vandalia VOR/DME 162[deg] radials (CORKI Fix) and
the Spinner, IL, VORTAC. As amended, the airway would be changed to
extend between the Spinner VORTAC and the Rochester VOR/DME.
    T-272: T-272 currently extends between the Hallsville, MO, VORTAC
and the Vandalia, IL, VOR/DME. The FAA proposes to change the Vandalia,
IL (VLA), VOR/DME route point to the TYMME, IL, WP which is located
approximately 60 feet northeast of the Vandalia VOR/DME. As amended,
the route would be changed to extend between the Hallsville VORTAC and
the TYMME WP. Additionally, the Hallsville, MO, ``HLV'' identifier
would be added to the first line of the route description and the
geographic coordinates of each route point would be updated to be
expressed in degrees, minutes, seconds, and hundredths of a second.
    The NAVAID radials listed in the V-14 description below are
unchanged and stated in degrees True north.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to

keep them operationally current. It, therefore: (1) is not a
``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is
not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
(44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation
of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal.
Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic
procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this proposed rule,
when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

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

Paragraph 6010(a) Domestic VOR Federal Airways.

* * * * *

V-14 [Amended]

    From Chisum, NM; Lubbock, TX; Childress, TX; Hobart, OK; Will
Rogers, OK; INT Will Rogers 052[deg] and Tulsa, OK, 246[deg]
radials; to Tulsa. From Springfield, MO; Vichy, MO; INT Vichy
067[deg] and St. Louis, MO, 225[deg] radials; to St. Louis. From
Terre Haute, IN; Brickyard, IN; Muncie, IN; to Flag City, OH.
* * * * *

V-67 [Amended]

    From Spinner, IL; Burlington, IA; Iowa City, IA; Cedar Rapids,
IA; Waterloo, IA; to Rochester, MN.
* * * * *

Paragraph 6011 United States Area Navigation Routes.

* * * * *

T-272 Hallsville, MO (HLV) to TYMME, IL [Amended]

Hallsville, MO (HLV)          VORTAC              (Lat. 39[deg]06'48.75'' N, long. 092[deg]07'41.64'' W)
TYMME, IL                     WP                  (Lat. 39[deg]05'38.35'' N, long. 089[deg]09'43.71'' W)

* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, on April 20, 2023.
Brian Konie,
Acting Manager, Airspace Rules and Regulations.
[FR Doc. 2023-08802 Filed 5-5-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


MEMORANDUM

DATE:	November 18, 2014

SUBJECT:	Revised Cost Impacts of Pressure Relief Device Monitoring for the Off-site Waste and Recovery Operations Source Category

FROM:	Lesley Stobert, EC/R Inc.

TO:		Paula Hirtz, EPA/OAQPS/SPPD/RCG

      The purpose of this memorandum is to present the revised estimated cost impacts of the proposed requirements for pressure relief device (PRD) monitoring for the Off-site Waste and Recovery Operations (OSWRO) source category. The requirements for OSWRO facilities are being finalized in 40 CFR part 63, subpart DD and apply to major sources of hazardous air pollutants (HAP) emissions at existing and new facilities under the national emissions standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP). The addition of PRD monitoring to the NESHAP for this source category is being finalized along with proposed changes evaluated under the EPA's Risk and Technology Review (RTR) program, which is addressing statutory requirements under section 112(d)(6) and 112(f)(2) of the Clean Air Act (CAA). The costs of the PRD monitoring program for OSWRO facilities has been updated since proposal to include the costs for four additional facilities that the EPA has learned are subject to the OSWRO NESHAP. Section 1 provides background information, followed by the estimated costs of the final PRD monitoring requirements for the source category in section 2.

1.0  	BACKGROUND

      On July 2, 2014 (79 FR 37850), the EPA proposed amendments to the OSWRO source category following the results of a review required by section 112(d)(6) of the CAA, which directs the EPA to review previously issued NESHAP regulations and to revise them as necessary (taking into account developments in practices, processes and control technologies) no less frequently than every 8 years. Section 112(f)(2) of the CAA requires the EPA to assess, within 8 years of promulgation of the original NESHAP for major sources and area sources subject to MACT, the remaining risks due to emissions of HAP from these source categories and determine whether the emissions standards provide an ample margin of safety to protect public health. These reviews are collectively referred to as residual risk and technology reviews (RTRs).

  	In addition to the residual risk and technology reviews performed regarding the NESHAP, the EPA also reviews existing provisions of the NESHAP during the RTR process. In light of and consistent with a 2008 United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit decision (Sierra Club v. EPA, 551 F.3d 1019 (D.C. Cir. 2008)), in which portions of two provisions in the EPA's CAA section 112 regulations governing the emissions of HAP during periods of startup, shutdown and malfunction (SSM) were vacated, the EPA proposed to eliminate the SSM exemption for the OSWRO source category and require that the CAA section 112(d) emissions standards apply at all times, including periods of SSM. In addition, in order for the treatment of malfunction-caused releases to the atmosphere to conform with the reasoning of the Court's ruling, the EPA proposed that PRDs in off-site material service must be monitored. For the July 2014 proposal, the cost of these monitoring devices were estimated. Following the July 2014 proposal, the EPA received information from industry representatives that four additional facilities that were not known to be part of the OSWRO source category are subject to the OSWRO NESHAP. We have revised our analysis of PRD monitoring costs for the OSWRO source category to include these four additional facilities for a total of 49 facilities that will be impacted by these requirements.

2.0 	COST IMPACTS

      Owners or operators could use a range of methods to identify pressure releases, record the time and duration of each pressure release and immediately notify operators that a pressure release is occurring, including parameter monitoring systems that facilities may already have in place. However, in order to estimate the costs associated with requiring monitoring of PRDs for OSWRO facilities, it was conservatively assumed that operators would install wireless electronic indicators on each PRD in off-site material service that vents to the atmosphere. To estimate the cost of electronic indicators, we used information from analyses performed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) of California, which were conducted in support of a rule that requires continuous monitoring of a percentage of PRDs at refineries by installing a monitoring device capable of recording the duration of each release and quantifying emissions. Wireless technology allows continuous monitoring of PRDs and makes it easier for operators to identify releases and leaks. There are several types of monitoring devices available, including acoustic sensors and pressure/differential pressure sensors. These sensor units communicate with a base radio that interfaces with the existing control system. The costs for PRD wireless monitoring, based on information from the SCAQMD analyses, are summarized in Table 1. We note that our cost estimate, which assumed the installation of electronic indicators on each relief device that vents to the atmosphere, likely overstates actual costs to the industry, as an owner or operator may use parameter monitoring systems already in place.

      The monitoring device cost provided by the SCAQMD was based on vendor costs and ranged from $5,000 to $10,000, with an average of $7,500, and includes device parts, installation, and maintenance, as well as a data retrieval system. According to the SCAQMD analyses, annual operating costs are minimal because they typically only include periodic replacement of inexpensive batteries. It was assumed that, for this analysis, these costs were presented in 2007 dollars and were therefore escalated to 2012 dollars. As a result, the total capital investment was determined to be $8,345 per PRD.

      According to the SCAQMD analyses, the cost of electronic monitoring systems is not linear, and facilities requiring a larger number of monitors are expected to benefit from economies of scale. Therefore, the sixth-tenths rule was applied to calculate initial costs. As shown in Table 1, the total capital investment for the model OSWRO facility, which has 13 PRDs, was determined to be $38,900. A capital recovery factor of 0.1424 was applied to the total capital investment to get an annualized cost for the model plant of $5,500/yr (no operating costs were estimated as they are assumed to be minimal).

    Table 1. Total Capital Investment and Annualized Cost of PRD Monitoring

Cost Parameter
                                     Value
Number of PRDs at Model OSWRO Facility[a]
                                      13
Unit Device Installation Cost[b]
                             $7,500 (2007 Dollars)

                           $8,345 (2012 Dollars)[c]
Facility Total Capital Investment[d]
                                    $38,886
Total Capital Investment for the OSWRO Source Category[e]
                                  $1,905,410
Capital Recovery Factor
                                   0.1424[f]
Total Annualized Cost Per Facility
                                    $5,537
Total Annualized Cost for the OSWRO Source Category[e]
                                   $271,313
        Minor discrepancies are due to rounding.
        [a] Median of number of PRDs reported in responses to a questionnaire sent to OSWRO facilities in 2013 under the authority of CAA section 114.
        [b] Device cost is average of range provided.
        [c] Chemical Engineering Index for 2007 is 525.4 and 584.6 for 2012.
        [d] Calculated using sixth-tenths rule. Facility Cost ($) = PRD Unit Cost ($) * (No. of PRDs)^0.6
        [e] Total costs for the source category based on 49 facilities that will be subject to these requirements.
        [f] Capital recovery factor calculated based on 7 percent interest and 10 year equipment life.


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 200 (Wednesday, October 18, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 71856-71858]
[FR Doc No: 2023-22995]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0750; FRL-11375-01-OCSPP]

Pesticide Registration Review; Proposed Decisions for Several
Pesticides; Notice of Availability

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of EPA's proposed
interim registration review decisions for bromine, chlorothalonil and
triadimefon, and the proposed final registration review decisions for
Agrobacterium rodiobacter, and porcine zona pellucida (PZP). This
notice also opens a 60-day public comment period on the proposed
decisions.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 18, 2023.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0750, through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at https://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. Additional
instructions on commenting and visiting the docket, along with more
information about dockets generally, is available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    For pesticide specific information, contact: The Chemical Review
Manager for the pesticide of interest identified in Table 1 in Unit IV.
    For general information on the registration review program,
contact: Melanie Biscoe, Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division (7508P),
Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:
(202) 566-0701; email address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action is directed to the public in general and may be of
interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human
health, farm worker, and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry;
pesticide users; and members of the public interested in the sale,
distribution, or use of pesticides. Since others also may be
interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific
entities that may be affected by this action. If you have any questions
regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity,
consult the Chemical Review Manager for the pesticide of interest
identified in Table 1 in Unit IV.

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 on 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 preparing and submitting
your comments, see the commenting tips at: https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
    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 pesticides
discussed in this document, compared to the general population.

II. Background

    Registration review is EPA's periodic review of pesticide
registrations to ensure that each pesticide continues to satisfy the
statutory standard for registration, that is, the pesticide can perform
its intended function without unreasonable adverse effects on human
health or the environment. As part of the registration review process,
the Agency has completed proposed interim or proposed final decisions
for all pesticides listed in Table 1 in Unit IV. Through this program,
EPA is ensuring that each pesticide's registration is based on current
scientific and other knowledge, including its effects on human health
and the environment.

III. Authority

    EPA is conducting its registration review of the chemicals listed
in the Table 1 in Unit IV pursuant to section 3(g) of the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Procedural
Regulations for Registration Review at 40 CFR part 155, subpart C.
Section 3(g) of FIFRA provides, among other things, that the
registrations of pesticides are to be reviewed every 15 years. Under
FIFRA, a pesticide product may be registered or remain registered only
if it meets the statutory standard for registration given in FIFRA
section 3(c)(5) (7 U.S.C. 136a(c)(5)). When used in accordance with
widespread and commonly recognized practice, the pesticide product must
perform its intended function without unreasonable adverse effects on
the environment; that is, without any unreasonable risk to man or the
environment, or a human dietary risk from residues that result from the
use of a pesticide in or on food.

IV. What action is the Agency taking?

    Pursuant to 40 CFR 155.58, this notice announces the availability
of EPA's proposed interim or proposed final registration review
decisions for the pesticides shown in Table 1 and opens a 60-day public
comment period on the proposed interim and proposed final registration
review decisions.

                                  Table 1--Proposed Interim and Final Decisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Chemical review manager
 Registration review case name and No.                   Docket ID No.                  and contact information
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agrobacterium radiobacter Case Number    EPA-HQ-OPP-2022-0860........................  Joseph Mabon,
 4101.                                                                                [email protected]
<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Bromine Case Number 4015...............  EPA-HQ-OPP-2021-0034........................  Megan Snyderman,
                                                                                [email protected]
<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Chlorothalonil Case Number 0097........  EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0840........................  Natalie Bray,
                                                                                [email protected]
<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Porcine Zona Pellucida (PZP) Case        EPA-HQ-OPP-2022-0153........................  Ben Tweed,
 Number 7801-2.                                                                         [email protected]
<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Triadimefon Case Number 2700...........  EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0114........................  Matthew Khan,
                                                                                [email protected]
<PHONE_NUMBER>.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The registration review docket for a pesticide includes earlier
documents related to the registration review case. For example, the
review opened with a Preliminary Work Plan, for public comment. A Final
Work Plan was placed in the docket following public comment on the
Preliminary Work Plan.
    The documents in the dockets describe EPA's rationales for
conducting additional risk assessments for the registration review of
the pesticides included in Table 1 in Unit IV, as well as the Agency's
subsequent risk findings and consideration of possible risk mitigation
measures. These proposed interim and proposed final registration review
decisions are supported by the rationales included in those documents.
Following public comment, the Agency will issue interim or final
registration review decisions for the pesticides listed in Table 1 in
Unit IV.
    The registration review final rule at 40 CFR 155.58(a) provides for
a minimum 60-day public comment period on all proposed registration
review decisions. This comment period is intended to provide an
opportunity for public input and a mechanism for initiating any
necessary amendments to the proposed decision. All comments should be
submitted using the methods in ADDRESSES and must be received by EPA on
or before the closing date. These comments will become part of the
docket for the pesticides included in Table 1 in Unit IV. Comments
received after the close of the comment period will be marked ``late.''
EPA is not required to consider these late comments.
    The Agency will carefully consider all comments received by the
closing date and may provide a ``Response to Comments Memorandum'' in
the docket. The interim or final registration review decision will
explain the effect that any comments had on the interim or final
decision and provide the Agency's response to significant comments.
    Background on the registration review program is provided at:
https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-reevaluation.
    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.

    Dated: October 13, 2023.
Mary Elissa Reaves,
Director, Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division, Office of Pesticide
Programs.
[FR Doc. 2023-22995 Filed 10-17-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 203 (Monday, October 25, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 58963]
[FR Doc No: 2021-23151]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[SEC File No. 270-336, OMB Control No. 3235-0379]

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

Upon Written Request Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549-2736

Extension:
    Form F-X

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') has submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget this request for extension of the previously approved
collection of information discussed below.
    Form F-X (17 CFR 239.42) is used to appoint an agent for service of
process by Canadian issuers registering securities on Forms F-7, F-8,
F-9 or F-10 under the Securities Act of 1933 (15 U.S.C. 77a et seq.),
or filing periodic reports on Form 40-F under the Exchange Act of 1934
(15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.). The information collected must be filed with
the Commission and is publicly available. We estimate it takes
approximately 2 hours per response to prepare Form F-X and the
information is filed by approximately 114 respondents for a total
annual reporting burden of 228 hours (2 hours per response x 114
responses).
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid control number.
    The public may view background documentation for this information
collection at the following website: www.reginfo.gov. Find this
particular information collection by selecting ``Currently under 30-day
Review--Open for Public Comments'' or by using the search function.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information
collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice
to (i) www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain and (ii) David Bottom,
Director/Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission,
c/o Cynthia Roscoe, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549, or by
sending an email to: [email protected].

    Dated: October 19, 2021.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-23151 Filed 10-22-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 1 (Tuesday, January 2, 2018)] [Rules and Regulations] [Page 33] [FR Doc No: C1-2017-25945]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R02-OAR-2017-0013; FRL 9971-28-Region 2]

Approval and Revision of Air Quality Implementation Plans; State  of New York; Regional Haze State and Federal Implementation Plans

Correction

    In rule document 2017-25945 beginning on page 57126 in the issue of  Monday December 4, 2017, make the following correction:

Sec.  52.1670  [Corrected]

0 In Sec.  52.1670, on page 57130, in the table, beneath the column  titled ``EPA approval date'', ``11/4/17'' should read ``12/4/17''.

[FR Doc. C1-2017-25945 Filed 12-29-17; 8:45 am]  BILLING CODE 1301-00-D


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 157 (Tuesday, August 14, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48512-48513]
[FR Doc No: 2012-19868]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 12514-056]

Northern Indiana Public Service Company; Notice of Application
for Amendment of License and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene
and Protests

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Application Type: Temporary variance of license article 403.
    b. Project No: 12514-056.
    c. Date Filed: August 3, 2012.
    d. Applicant: Northern Indiana Public Service Company (licensee).
    e. Name of Project: Norway-Oakdale Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: The Norway-Oakdale Project is located on the
Tippecanoe River near the town of Monticello, in Carroll and White
counties, Indiana. The project consists of the upper Norway development
and the lower Oakdale development each of which has a dam and
powerhouse.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791a-825r.
    h. Applicant Contact: Mr. Justin Darling, Hydro Supervisor--
Chemical and Environmental Compliance, Northern Indiana Public Service
Company, 1414 W. Broadway, Monticello, IN 47960,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Ms. Kelly Houff at<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or Mr. Robert Ballantine at<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and
protests: August 24, 2012.
    All documents may be filed electronically via the Internet. See, 18
CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web
site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. If unable to be
filed electronically, documents may be paper-filed. To paper-file, an
original and seven copies should be mailed to: Secretary, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters,
without prior registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and
contact information at the end of your comments.
    Please include the project number (P-12514-056) on any comments,
motions, or recommendations filed.
    k. Description of Request: Northern Indiana Public Service Company,
licensee for the Norway-Oakdale Hydroelectric Project, requests the
Commission to grant a temporary variance of license Article 403 due to
regional drought conditions. Article 403, in part, requires the
licensee to operate the project in a run-of-river manner where, project
outflow is equal to project inflow and to maintain lake elevations of
Lake Shafer within 0.25 feet of elevation 647.47 feet
National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) and Lake Freeman within 0.25 feet of elevation 612.45 NGVD. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service and the Indiana Department of Natural Resources have determined
that the licensee must release a minimum flow of 200 cubic feet per
second (cfs) from the Oakdale Dam for the preservation of federally
endangered mussel species which inhabit the Tippecanoe River downstream
of the project reservoirs. Due to regional drought conditions affecting
the project watershed, the release of 200 cfs downstream of the
project, at times, may not be equal to project inflow and therefore may
result in the lake elevations deviating from the 0.25 feet
NGVD range as stated in Article 403 of the project license. The
licensee requests the variance until December 1, 2012, or until an
earlier date if drought conditions improve.
    l. Locations of the Application: A copy of the application is
available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public
Reference Room, located at 888 First Street NE., Room 2A, Washington,
DC 20426, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. This filing may also be viewed on
the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary''
link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the
docket number field to access the document. You may also register
online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be
notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or
other pending projects. For assistance, call<PHONE_NUMBER> or email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>for TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is also
available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item (h)
above.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.214.

In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will
consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file
a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may
become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to
intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for
the particular application.
    o. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: Any filing must (1)
bear in all capital letters the title ``COMMENTS''; ``PROTESTS'', or
``MOTION TO INTERVENE'' as applicable; (2) set forth in the heading the
name of the applicant and the project number of the application to
which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone
number of the person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise
comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All
comments, motions to intervene, or protests must set forth their
evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR
4.34(b). Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly from
the applicant. A copy of any protest or motion to intervene must be
served upon each representative of the applicant specified in the
particular application. If an intervener files comments or documents
with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect
the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also
serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. A copy of all
other filings in reference to this application must be accompanied by
proof of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared by
the Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b)
and 385.2010.

    Dated: August 8, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-19868 Filed 8-13-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P