[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 42 (Tuesday, March 4, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 12261]
[FR Doc No: 2014-04815]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[File No. 500-1]

Trilliant Exploration Corp.; Order of Suspension of Trading

February 28, 2014.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of complete and accurate information concerning the securities
of Trilliant Exploration Corp. (``Trilliant'') because of questions
that have been raised about the accuracy and reliability of publicly
available information concerning, among other things, Trilliant's
financial condition. Trilliant was a Nevada corporation based in New
York, New York, whose corporate status was revoked in January 2013. Its
securities are quoted on OTC Link (previously ``Pink Sheets'') operated
by OTC Markets Group, Inc. under the ticker symbol ``TTXP.''
    The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the
protection of investors require a suspension of trading in the
securities of the above-listed company.
    Therefore, it is ordered, pursuant to Section 12(k) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that trading in the securities of the
above-listed company is suspended for the period from 9:30 a.m. EST on
February 28, 2014, through 11:59 p.m. EDT on March 13, 2014.

    By the Commission.
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-04815 Filed 2-28-14; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 214 (Monday, November 5, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 66457]
[FR Doc No: 2012-26921]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

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

    Docket Numbers: EC13-23-000.
    Applicants: AEE2, L.L.C., AES ES Westover, LLC.
    Description: Joint Application for Authorization Under Section 203
of the Federal Power Act and Request for Expedited Action of AEE2,
L.L.C., et al.
    Filed Date: 10/24/12.
    Accession Number: 20121024-5140.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/14/12.

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

    Docket Numbers: ER12-50-001.
    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.
    Description: 2012-10-24 CAISO Flexible Ramping Constraints
Compliance Filing to be effective 11/1/2012.
    Filed Date: 10/24/12.
    Accession Number: 20121024-5126.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/14/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-1021-001.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
    Description: 10-24-2012 CDC Compliance Filing to be effective 9/1/
2012.
    Filed Date: 10/24/12.
    Accession Number: 20121024-5121.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/14/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-182-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Queue No. W4-010, Original Service Agreement No. 3405
to be effective 9/24/2012.
    Filed Date: 10/24/12.
    Accession Number: 20121024-5134.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/14/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-183-000.
    Applicants: Clear Choice Energy, LLC.
    Description: Baseline New to be effective 12/8/2012.
    Filed Date: 10/25/12.
    Accession Number: 20121025-5002.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/15/12.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following land
acquisition reports:

    Docket Numbers: LA12-3-000.
    Applicants: Canastota Windpower, LLC, Caney River Wind Project, LLC
EGP Stillwater Solar, LLC, Enel Stillwater, LLC, Smoky Hills Wind Farm,
LLC, Smoky Hills Wind Project II, LLC, Rocky Ridge Wind Project, LLC,
Chisholm View Wind Project, LLC.
    Description: Quarterly Land Acquisition Report of Enel Green Power
North America, Inc.
    Filed Date: 10/25/12.
    Accession Number: 20121025-5030.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/15/12.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: October 25, 2012.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-26921 Filed 11-2-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 34 (Friday, February 18, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 9245-9250]
[FR Doc No: 2022-03385]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2020-0607; FRL-9454-01-OCSPP]

Fluopyram; Pesticide Tolerances

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation amends tolerances for residues of fluopyram in
or on cereal grain crop group 15 (except corn and rice), rapeseed
subgroup 20A, and multiple animal commodities, which are identified and
discussed later in this document. This regulation also establishes an
import tolerance for residues of fluopyram in or on coffee. Bayer
CropScience requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

DATES: This regulation is effective February 18, 2022. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before April 19, 2022, and
must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR
part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2020-0607, is available at
https://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs
Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection
Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg.,
Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001. The
Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Due to the public health concerns related to COVID-19, the EPA
Docket Center (EPA/DC) and Reading Room is open to visitors by
appointment only. For the latest status information on EPA/DC services
and access, visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marietta Echeverria, Registration
Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-
0001; main telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
RDFR[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
The following list of North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them.
Potentially affected entities may include:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

B. How can I get electronic access to other related information?

    You may access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA's
tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Office of the
Federal Register's e-CFR site at https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-40.

C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2020-0607 in the subject line on the first
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must
be in writing and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before
April 19, 2022. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections and
hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for
inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without
prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing
request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2020-0607, by one of
the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at https://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance

    In the Federal Register of February 25, 2021 (86 FR 11488) (FRL-
10020-47), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3),
21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP
0F8855) by Bayer CropScience, 800 N Lindbergh Blvd., St. Louis, MO
63167. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.661(a)(1) be amended by
establishing a tolerance for residues of the fungicide fluopyram, N-[2-
[3-chloro-5-(trifluoromethyl)-2-pyridinyl]ethyl]-2-
(trifluoromethyl)benzamide, in or on the following raw agricultural
commodity: Coffee at 0.03 parts per million (ppm). The petition also
requested to amend tolerances in 40 CFR 180.661(a)(1) for residues of
the fungicide fluopyram in or on the following raw agricultural
commodities: Grain, cereal, group 15, except corn and rice at 0.5 ppm;
and Rapeseed subgroup 20A at 0.3 ppm. In addition, the petition
requested to amend tolerances in 40 CFR 180.661(a)(2) for residues of
the fungicide fluopyram in or on the following animal commodities:
Cattle, fat at 0.60 ppm; Cattle, meat at 0.60 ppm; Cattle, meat
byproducts at 6.0 ppm; Egg at 0.06 ppm; Goat, fat at 0.60 ppm; Goat,
meat at 0.60 ppm; Goat, meat byproducts at 6.0 ppm; Hog, fat at 0.01
ppm; Hog, meat at 0.01 ppm; Hog, meat byproducts at 0.06 ppm; Horse,
fat at 0.60 ppm; Horse, meat at 0.60 ppm; Horse, meat byproducts at 6.0
ppm; Poultry, fat at 0.03 ppm; Poultry, meat at 0.03 ppm; Poultry, meat
byproducts at 0.10 ppm; Sheep, fat at 0.60 ppm; Sheep, meat at 0.60
ppm; and Sheep, meat byproducts at 6.0 ppm. That document referenced a
summary of the petition prepared by Bayer CropScience, the registrant,
which is available in the docket, https://www.regulations.gov. Comments
were received on the notice of filing. EPA's response to these comments
is discussed in Unit IV.C.
    Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA is
establishing and amending, in accordance with section 408(d)(4)(a)(i),
tolerances that vary in some respects from what the petitioner
requested. The reasons for these changes are explained in Unit IV.D.

III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

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

occupational exposure. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to
give special consideration to exposure of infants and children to the
pesticide chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure
that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to
infants and children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical
residue. . . .''
    Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), and the factors
specified in FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the available
scientific data and other relevant information in support of this
action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a
determination on aggregate exposure for fluopyram including exposure
resulting from the tolerances established by this action. EPA's
assessment of exposures and risks associated with fluopyram follows.
    In an effort to streamline its publications in the Federal
Register, EPA is not reprinting sections that repeat what has been
previously published for tolerance rulemakings of the same pesticide
chemical. Where scientific information concerning a particular chemical
remains unchanged, the content of those sections would not vary between
tolerance rulemakings and republishing the same sections is
unnecessary. EPA considers referral back to those sections as
sufficient to provide an explanation of the information EPA considered
in making its safety determination for the new rulemaking.
    EPA has previously published a number of tolerance rulemakings for
fluopyram, in which EPA concluded, based on the available information,
that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm would result from
aggregate exposure to fluopyram and established tolerances for residues
of that chemical. EPA is incorporating previously published sections
from those rulemakings as described further in this rulemaking, as they
remain unchanged.
    Toxicological profile. For a discussion of the Toxicological
Profile of fluopyram, see Unit III.A. of the July 1, 2019, rulemaking
(84 FR 31208) (FRL-9994-36).
    Toxicological points of departure/Levels of concern. For a summary
of the Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern used for the
safety assessment, see Unit III.B. of the July 1, 2019, rulemaking.
    Exposure assessment. Much of the exposure assessment remains the
same, although updates have occurred to accommodate exposures from the
petitioned-for tolerances. The updates are discussed in this section;
for a description of the rest of the EPA approach to and assumptions
for the exposure assessment, see Unit III.C. of the July 1, 2019,
rulemaking.
    EPA's dietary exposure assessments have been updated to include:
The reduced exposure from the revised uses (lower maximum application
rates) of fluopyram on cereal grain crop group 15 (except corn and
rice) and rapeseed subgroup 20A; the reduced anticipated residues in
livestock commodities; and the additional exposure associated with the
import tolerance on coffee. For the acute dietary exposure assessment,
EPA used the highest average field trial concentrations for coffee,
cereal grain group 15, and rapeseed 20A. All other commodities used
tolerance-level residues. The acute analysis used 100 percent crop
treated (PCT) for all commodities. For the chronic dietary exposure
assessment, EPA used field trial mean residue values and incorporated
the same PCT data that were used in the July 1, 2019, rulemaking for
existing uses, as well as chronic refined inputs to the livestock
anticipated residues of field trial median data. EPA assumed 100 PCT
for coffee, cereal grain crop group 15 (except corn and rice), and
rapeseed subgroup 20A.
    Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) information.
Section 408(b)(2)(E) of FFDCA authorizes EPA to use available data and
information on the anticipated residue levels of pesticide residues in
food and the actual levels of pesticide residues that have been
measured in food. If EPA relies on such information, EPA must require
pursuant to FFDCA section 408(f)(1) that data be provided 5 years after
the tolerance is established, modified, or left in effect,
demonstrating that the levels in food are not above the levels
anticipated. For the present action, EPA will issue such data call-ins
as are required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(E) and authorized under
FFDCA section 408(f)(1). Data will be required to be submitted no later
than 5 years from the date of issuance of these tolerances.
    Section 408(b)(2)(F) of FFDCA states that the Agency may use data
on the actual percent of food treated for assessing chronic dietary
risk only if:
     Condition a: The data used are reliable and provide a
valid basis to show what percentage of the food derived from such crop
is likely to contain the pesticide residue.
     Condition b: The exposure estimate does not underestimate
exposure for any significant subpopulation group.
     Condition c: Data are available on pesticide use and food
consumption in a particular area, and the exposure estimate does not
understate exposure for the population in such area.
    In addition, the Agency must provide for periodic evaluation of any
estimates used. To provide for the periodic evaluation of the estimate
of PCT as required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(F), EPA may require
registrants to submit data on PCT.
    The Agency estimated the average PCT for existing uses for the
chronic dietary exposure assessment as follows: Almonds, 20%; apples,
25%; apricots, 5%; artichoke, 15%; broccoli, 2.5%; cabbage, 2.5%;
carrots, 1%; cauliflower, 1%; cherries, 25%; cotton, 1%; dry beans and
peas, 1%; grapefruit, 10%; grapes, raisins, 1%; table grapes, 5%; wine
grapes; 20%; lemons, 1%; lettuce, 1%; onions, 1%; oranges, 15%;
peaches, 1%; peanuts, 2.5%; pears, 5%; peppers, 5%; pistachios, 15%;
potatoes, 20%; strawberries, 10%; tomatoes, 1%; walnuts, 10%; and
watermelons, 15%.
    In most cases, EPA uses available data from United States
Department of Agriculture/National Agricultural Statistics Service
(USDA/NASS), proprietary market surveys, and California Department of
Pesticide Regulation (CalDPR) Pesticide Use Reporting (PUR) for the
chemical/crop combination for the most recent 10 years. EPA uses an
average PCT for chronic dietary risk analysis and a maximum PCT for
acute dietary risk analysis. The average PCT figure for each existing
use is derived by combining available public and private market survey
data for that use, averaging across all observations, and rounding to
the nearest 5%, except for those situations in which the average PCT is
less than 1% or less than 2.5%. In those cases, the Agency would use
<1% or <2.5% as the average PCT value, respectively. The maximum PCT
figure is the highest observed maximum value reported within the recent
10 years of available public and private market survey data for the
existing use and rounded up to the nearest multiple of 5%, except where
the maximum PCT is less than 2.5%, in which case, the Agency uses <2.5%
as the maximum PCT.
    The Agency believes that the three conditions discussed earlier
have been met. With respect to Condition a, PCT estimates are derived
from Federal and private market survey data, which are reliable and
have a valid basis. The Agency is reasonably certain that the
percentage of the food treated is not likely to be an underestimation.
As to Conditions b and c, regional consumption information and
consumption information for significant subpopulations is taken into
account

through EPA's computer-based model for evaluating the exposure of
significant subpopulations including several regional groups. Use of
this consumption information in EPA's risk assessment process ensures
that EPA's exposure estimate does not understate exposure for any
significant subpopulation group and allows the Agency to be reasonably
certain that no regional population is exposed to residue levels higher
than those estimated by the Agency. Other than the data available
through national food consumption surveys, EPA does not have available
reliable information on the regional consumption of food to which
fluopyram may be applied in a particular area.
    Drinking water, non-occupational, and cumulative exposures.
Drinking water exposures and residential (non-occupational) exposures
are not impacted by the revised uses and import tolerance in this
action, and thus have not changed from the July 1, 2019, rulemaking.
Fluopyram is currently registered for use on golf course turf,
residential lawns, fruit trees, nut trees, ornamentals and gardens that
could result in residential exposures. The most conservative
residential risk estimates that were used in the aggregate assessment
are adult handler inhalation exposures from treating lawns with a hose-
end spray and incidental oral hand-to-mouth post-application exposure
to treated lawns for children aged 1 to less than 2 years old. EPA's
conclusions concerning cumulative risk remain unchanged from the July
1, 2019, rulemaking.
    Safety factor for infants and children. EPA continues to conclude
that there is reliable data to support the reduction of the Food
Quality Protection Act (FQPA) safety factor. See Unit III.D. of the
July 1, 2019, rulemaking for a discussion of the Agency's rationale for
that determination.
    Aggregate risks and determination of safety. EPA determines whether
acute and chronic dietary pesticide exposures are safe by comparing
aggregate exposure estimates to the acute population adjusted dose
(aPAD) and chronic population adjusted (cPAD). For linear cancer risks,
EPA calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term
risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate food, water,
and residential exposure to the appropriate points of departure to
ensure that an adequate margin of exposure (MOE) exists.
    Acute dietary risks are below the Agency's level of concern of 100%
of the aPAD; they are 24% of the aPAD for children 1 to 2 years old,
the population group receiving the greatest exposure. Chronic dietary
risks are below the Agency's level of concern of 100% of the cPAD; they
are 78% of the cPAD for children 1 to 2 years old, the population group
receiving the greatest exposure.
    As explained in the July 1, 2019, rule, the Agency analyzed short-
term inhalation exposure to residential handlers and short-term
incidental oral hand-to-mouth post-application exposure to children 1
to 2 years old on treated lawns. Using the exposure assumptions
described in this unit for short-term exposures, EPA has concluded the
combined short-term food, water, and residential exposures result in
aggregate MOEs of 1,500 for both adults (using a residential handler
exposure scenario) and post-application exposure to children 1 to 2
years old. Because EPA's level of concern for fluopyram is an MOE of
100 or below, these MOEs are not of concern.
    As stated in the July 1, 2019, rule, fluopyram is not registered
for any use patterns that would result in intermediate-term residential
exposure. Because there is no intermediate-term residential exposure
and chronic dietary exposure has been assessed under the appropriately
protective cPAD, EPA relies on the chronic dietary risk assessment for
evaluating intermediate-term risk for fluopyram.
    Based on the lack of evidence of carcinogenicity in two adequate
rodent carcinogenicity studies, fluopyram is not expected to pose a
cancer risk to humans.
    Therefore, based on the risk assessments and information described
above, EPA concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm
will result to the general population, or to infants and children from
aggregate exposure to fluopyram residues. More detailed information can
be found at https://www.regulations.gov in the document titled
``Fluopyram. Human Health Risk Assessment for the Revision of Permanent
Tolerances and Registration for Use on Cereal Grain Crop Group 15 and
Rapeseed Subgroup 20A, and for the Establishment of Permanent Tolerance
without U.S. Registration for Residues in/on Coffee Commodities'' in
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2020-0607.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    For a discussion of the available analytical enforcement method,
see Unit IV.A. of the July 1, 2019, rulemaking.

B. International Residue Limits

    In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations
Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food
standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain
the reasons for departing from the Codex level.
    The Codex has established MRLs for fluopyram in or on canola at 1
ppm and rye grain and wheat grain both at 0.9 ppm. EPA is not
harmonizing the U.S. tolerances for rapeseed subgroup 20A and crop
group 15 (except rice and corn) with the Codex MRLs for canola, rye
grain, or wheat grain because the U.S. tolerances are being harmonized
with the Canadian MRLs as part of a joint review with the U.S.'s major
trading partner.
    The Codex has also established MRLs for fluopyram in or on milk at
0.8 ppm, cattle fat at 1.5 ppm, cattle meat at 1.5 ppm, cattle meat
byproducts at 8 ppm, hog fat at 1.5 ppm, hog meat at 1.5 ppm, hog meat
byproducts at 8 ppm, eggs at 2 ppm, poultry fat at 1 ppm, poultry meat
at 1.5 ppm and poultry, kidney and poultry, liver at 5 ppm. To be
consistent with Canada, EPA is not harmonizing the U.S. tolerances for
milk, cattle fat, cattle meat, cattle meat byproducts, hog fat, hog
meat, hog meat byproducts, eggs, poultry fat, poultry meat, and poultry
meat byproducts with the Codex MRLs above. The U.S. and Canada are
jointly reviewing the revised use pattern in the fluopyram petition.
Because the maximum application rates for livestock feed items
(rapeseed subgroup 20A and cereal grains group 15 (except corn and
rice)) are being reduced in both countries, the tolerances on both
plant and livestock commodities are being decreased in both countries.
    Codex has not established an MRL for residues of fluopyram in or on
coffee commodities.

C. Response to Comments

    Two comments were submitted to the docket in response to the
February 25, 2021 Notice of Filing. Although the Agency recognizes that
some individuals believe that pesticides should be banned on
agricultural commodities, the existing legal framework provided by
section 408 of the FFDCA authorizes EPA to establish tolerances when it
determines that the tolerance is safe. Upon consideration of the
validity, completeness, and reliability of the available data as well
as other factors the FFDCA requires EPA to consider, EPA has determined
that the fluopyram tolerances are safe. The commenters have provided no
information indicating that a safety determination cannot be supported.

D. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances

    The commodity definition for coffee is revised to coffee, green
beans and the tolerance is established at 0.03 ppm to reflect the OECD
rounding class.
    Livestock tolerances are revised based upon expected secondary
residues using the more reasonably balanced diet (MRBD) calculations
and incorporating observed transfer factors. The petition states that
the proposed cattle tolerances should be extended to all ruminants;
however, those tolerances should be individually revised. Therefore,
tolerances are amended for cattle, meat at 0.3 ppm; cattle, fat at 0.3
ppm; cattle, meat byproducts at 3 ppm; horse, meat at 0.3 ppm; horse,
fat at 0.3 ppm; horse, meat byproducts at 3 ppm; goat, meat at 0.3 ppm;
goat, fat at 0.3 ppm; goat, meat byproducts at 3 ppm; sheep, meat at
0.3 ppm; sheep, fat at 0.3 ppm; sheep, meat byproducts at 3 ppm; and
hog, meat byproducts at 0.04 ppm. Tolerances are amended for egg at
0.03 ppm; poultry, meat at 0.02 ppm; poultry, fat at 0.01 ppm; and
poultry, meat byproducts at 0.06 ppm. The Agency is also amending the
tolerance for milk at 0.15 ppm.

V. Conclusion

    Therefore, a tolerance is established for residues of fluopyram, N-
[2-[3-chloro-5-(trifluoromethyl)-2-pyridinyl]ethyl]-2-
(trifluoromethyl)benzamide, in or on coffee, green beans at 0.03 ppm,
and existing tolerances are amended to the following levels: Grain,
cereal, group 15, except corn and rice at 0.5 ppm; rapeseed subgroup
20A at 0.3 ppm; cattle, fat at 0.3 ppm; cattle, meat at 0.3 ppm;
cattle, meat byproducts at 3 ppm; egg at 0.03 ppm; goat, fat at 0.3
ppm; goat, meat at 0.3 ppm; goat, meat byproducts at 3 ppm; hog, fat at
0.01 ppm; hog, meat at 0.01 ppm; hog, meat byproducts at 0.04 ppm;
horse, fat at 0.3 ppm; horse, meat at 0.3 ppm; horse, meat byproducts
at 3 ppm; milk at 0.15 ppm; poultry, fat at 0.01 ppm; poultry, meat at
0.02 ppm; poultry, meat byproducts at 0.06 ppm; sheep, fat at 0.3 ppm;
sheep, meat at 0.3 ppm; sheep, meat byproducts at 3 ppm. For
transparency, the following list identifies the established tolerances
that are being amended to the levels listed above: Grain, cereal, group
15, except corn and rice at 4.0 ppm; rapeseed subgroup 20A at 5.0 ppm;
cattle, fat at 0.70 ppm; cattle, meat at 0.80 ppm; cattle, meat
byproducts at 7.5 ppm; egg at 0.08 ppm; goat, fat at 0.70 ppm; goat,
meat at 0.80 ppm; goat, meat byproducts at 7.5 ppm; hog, fat at 0.20
ppm; hog, meat at 0.02 ppm; hog, meat byproducts at 0.20 ppm; horse,
fat at 0.70 ppm; horse, meat at 0.80 ppm; horse, meat byproducts at 7.5
ppm; milk at 0.40 ppm; poultry, fat at 0.04 ppm; poultry, meat at 0.04
ppm; poultry, meat byproducts at 0.20 ppm; sheep, fat at 0.70 ppm;
sheep, meat at 0.80 ppm; and sheep, meat byproducts at 7.5 ppm.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action establishes tolerances under FFDCA section 408(d) in
response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and
Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this action has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this action is not
subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not contain any
information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require any
special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerances in
this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
    This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or Tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
Tribal Governments, on the relationship between the National Government
and the States or Tribal Governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian Tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this action. In addition, this
action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded
mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
    This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).

VII. Congressional Review Act

    Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.),
EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required
information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of
the rule in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule''
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

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

    Dated: February 11, 2022.
Catherine Aubee,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, for the reasons stated in the preamble, EPA is amending
40 CFR chapter I as follows:

PART 180--TOLERANCES AND EXEMPTIONS FOR PESTICIDE CHEMICAL RESIDUES
IN FOOD

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

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

0
2. In Sec.  180.661:
0
a. Amend paragraph (a)(1) by:
0
i. Designating the table as Table 1 to Paragraph (a)(1)'';
0
ii. Adding in alphabetical order the entry ``Coffee, green beans''; and
0
iii. Revising the entries ``Grain, cereal, group 15, except corn and
rice'' and ``Rapeseed subgroup 20A'';
0
b. Amend paragraph (a)(2) by:
0
i. Designating the table as Table 2 to Paragraph (a)(2); and
0
ii. Revising newly designated Table 2.
    The additions and revisions read as follows:

Sec.  180.661   Fluopyram; tolerances for residues.

    (a) * * *
    (1) * * *

                       Table 1 to Paragraph (a)(1)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Parts per
                          Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                * * * * *
Coffee, green beans \2\.....................................        0.03

                                * * * * *
Grain, cereal, group 15, except corn and rice...............         0.5

                                * * * * *
Rapeseed subgroup 20A.......................................         0.3

                                * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 * * * * *
\2\ There are no U.S. registrations on coffee, green beans as of
  February 18, 2022.

    (2) * * *

                       Table 2 to Paragraph (a)(2)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Parts per
                          Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cattle, fat.................................................         0.3
Cattle, meat................................................         0.3
Cattle, meat byproducts.....................................           3
Egg.........................................................        0.03
Goat, fat...................................................         0.3
Goat, meat..................................................         0.3
Goat, meat byproducts.......................................           3
Hog, fat....................................................        0.01
Hog, meat...................................................        0.01
Hog, meat byproducts........................................        0.04
Horse, fat..................................................         0.3
Horse, meat.................................................         0.3
Horse, meat byproducts......................................           3
Milk........................................................        0.15
Poultry, fat................................................        0.01
Poultry, meat...............................................        0.02
Poultry, meat byproducts....................................        0.06
Sheep, fat..................................................         0.3
Sheep, meat.................................................         0.3
Sheep, meat byproducts......................................           3
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2022-03385 Filed 2-17-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 139 (Monday, July 21, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 42275-42276]
[FR Doc No: 2014-17135]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 61

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0218; FRL-9914-06-OAR]
RIN 2060-AP26

Revisions to National Emission Standards for Radon Emissions From
Operating Mill Tailings

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency is announcing an extension
of the public comment period for the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(NPRM) requesting public comment and information on revisions to the
EPA's ``National Emission Standards for Radon Emissions from Operating
Mill Tailings''. The EPA published the NPRM on May 2, 2014 in the
Federal Register, which included a request for comments on or before
July 31, 2014. The purpose of this action is to extend the public
comment period an additional 90 days.

DATES: Written comments on the proposed rule published on May 2, 2014
(79 FR 25388) must be received on or before October 29, 2014.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2008-0218, by one of the following methods:
     www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
     Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Postal Service, send comments to: Air and
Radiation Docket, EPA Docket Center, Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-
0218, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460. Please include
a total of two copies.
    Hand Delivery: In person or by courier, deliver comments to: EPA
Docket Center, Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0218, EPA West, Room 3334,
1301 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004. Such deliveries are
only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. Please include a total of two copies.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2008-0218. The Agency's policy is that all comments received will be
included in the public docket without change and may be made available
online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov
or email. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access''
system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you
send an email comment directly to EPA without going through
www.regulations.gov your email address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket
and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact
information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you
submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to
consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special
characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional information about the EPA's public docket,
visit the

EPA Docket Center homepage at www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
for which disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material,
such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard
copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either
electronically in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA Docket
Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington,
DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the
Public Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the
Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Reid J. Rosnick, EPA Office of
Radiation and Indoor Air,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for the EPA?

    1. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
     Identify the rulemaking by docket number, subject heading,
Federal Register date and page number.
     Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives
and substitute language for your requested changes.
     Describe any assumptions and provide any technical
information and/or data that you used.
     If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow it to be
reproduced.
     Illustrate your concerns with specific examples and
suggest alternatives.
     Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the
use of profanity or personal threats.
     Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

B. How can I get copies of this document, the proposed rule and other
related information?

    The EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0218. The EPA has also developed a Web site for the
NPRM at: www.epa.gov/radiation/neshaps/subpartw/rulemaking-activity.html. Please refer to the original Federal Register notice on
the NPRM for detailed information on accessing information related to
the notice.
    In response to requests for an extension, we are extending the
public comment period for this NPRM through October 29, 2014. This
extension will provide the public additional time to provide comment on
updating this standard.

     Dated: July 11, 2014.
 Janet G. McCabe,
Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of Air and Radiation.
[FR Doc. 2014-17135 Filed 7-18-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: November 9, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 216)]
[Notices]
[Page 68122-68124]
[DOCID:fr09no05-120]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-52727; File No. SR-NASD-2005-121]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Association of Securities
Dealers, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change Relating to Amendments to Rule 3012, Rule 3013, and IM-3013

November 3, 2005.
    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 October 14, 2005, 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, and II below, which Items have been prepared by NASD. NASD has
designated the proposed rule change as constituting a ``non-
controversial'' rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act
\3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposal
effective upon receipt of this filing by the Commission. The Commission
is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule
change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    NASD is proposing to amend NASD Rule 3012 (Supervisory Control
System), Rule 3013 (Annual Certification of Compliance and Supervisory
Processes), and IM-3013 (Annual Compliance and Supervision
Certification) to allow members, by no later than April 1, 2006, to
submit the initial annual report required by Rule 3012 and to execute
the initial annual certification required by Rule 3013 and IM-3013.
Below is the text of the proposed rule change. Proposed new language is
in italics.
* * * * *
3012. Supervisory Control System
    (a) General Requirements
    (1) Each member shall designate and specifically identify to NASD
one or more principals who shall establish, maintain, and enforce a
system of supervisory control policies and procedures that (A) test and
verify that the member's supervisory procedures are reasonably designed
with respect to the activities of the member and its registered
representatives and associated persons, to achieve compliance with
applicable securities laws and regulations, and with applicable NASD
rules and (B) create additional or amend supervisory procedures where
the need is identified by such testing and verification. The designated
principal or principals must submit to the member's senior management
no less than annually, a report \5\ detailing each member's system of
supervisory controls, the summary of the test results and significant
identified exceptions, and any additional or amended supervisory
procedures created in response to the test results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Rule 3012 became effective on January 31, 2005, which would
require a member's first Rule 3012 report to be submitted by no
later than January 31, 2006 and at least annually thereafter;
however, a member may elect to submit its first Rule 3012 report by
no later than April 1, 2006. Importantly, a member's first Rule 3012
report must encompass the period from January 31, 2005 (the
effective date of Rule 3012) up to the submission date (or a
reasonable period of time immediately preceding the submission
date). Each ensuing Rule 3012 report may not be for a period greater
than 12 months from the date of the preceding Rule 3012 report (but
may be for a shorter time period if a member elects to prepare a
report more frequently than annually).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) No change.
    (b) Dual Member No change.
* * * * *
Rule 3013. Annual Certification of Compliance and Supervisory Processes
    (a) Designation of Chief Compliance Officer No change.
    (b) Annual Certification.
    Each member shall have its chief executive officer (or equivalent
officer) certify annually,\6\ as set forth in IM-3013, that the member
has in place processes to establish, maintain, review, test and modify
written compliance policies and written supervisory procedures
reasonably designed to achieve compliance with applicable NASD rules,
MSRB rules and federal securities laws and regulations, and that the
chief executive officer has conducted one or more meetings with the
chief compliance officer in the preceding 12 months to discuss such
processes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Rule 3013 and IM-3013 became effective on December 1, 2004,
which would require a member's first certification to be executed by
December 1, 2005 and annually thereafter; however, a member may
elect to execute its first certification by no later than April 1,
2006 and annually thereafter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

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
    Rule 3013 requires that each member's chief executive officer
(``CEO''), or other equivalent officer, certify annually according to
the terms set forth in IM-3013 that the member has in place processes
to establish, maintain, review, test and modify its written supervisory
procedures. The first annual certification is currently due by December
1, 2005.\7\ Before a CEO can complete the annual certification
requirement, IM-3013 requires, among other things, that the CEO, chief

compliance officer (``CCO''), and any other necessary officers review a
report that evidences the member's processes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Each ensuing annual certification must be effected no later
than on the anniversary date of the previous year's certification.
See IM-3013, n.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 3012(a)(1) requires, among other things, that each member
submit to its senior management no less than annually a report
detailing its supervisory controls system that will test and verify the
adequacy of its supervisory procedures, the summary of the test
results, and any additional or amended supervisory procedures created
in response to the test results. Currently, members must complete and
submit the report by January 31, 2006 and at least annually
thereafter.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Notice to Members 04-71 (October 2004) (announcing,
among other things, the effective date of January 31, 2005); see
also Transcript of December 16, 2004 Call-in Workshop
(``Transcript'') reminding members that Rule 3012 Report is due
within one year of the January 31, 2005 effective date and at least
annually thereafter. The Transcript is available at http://www.nasd.com/SupervisoryControl
.

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

    Since the adoption of these rules, NASD has received a number of
inquiries from members regarding whether the reports required by Rule
3012 and IM-3013 could be combined. Although NASD has advised members
that they may combine the Rule 3012 report with the report required by
IM-3013 as long as all of the required elements of the respective
reports are addressed and clearly identified, members have indicated
that it would be difficult to combine the reports since the first
annual certification required by Rule 3013 must be executed by December
1, 2005 (and thus the related report must be prepared in advance of,
but reasonably close in time to, such execution), while the Rule 3012
report is not required to be submitted until January 31, 2006.
    In addition, dual members have inquired whether they can combine
the reports required by Rule 3012 and IM-3013 with the Annual Report
required by NYSE Rule 342.30, which is due by April 1st of each year.
As support for their request, dual members have noted that the NYSE
Rule 342.30 Annual Report mandates similar, though not identical,
requirements as the Rule 3012 report. Dual members have also noted that
IM-3013 specifically provides that the IM-3013 report may be combined
with any other compliance or other similar report required by another
self-regulatory organization. Dual members assert that being able to
complete one report instead of being required to complete three reports
that could cover overlapping topics and issues would prevent the
duplication of significant resources. However, because of the disparate
dates by which the three reports must be completed, the dual members
have indicated that it would be nearly impossible to combine the
reports.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ It should be noted that Rule 3012(b) provides that any dual
member electing to comply with the substantially similar
requirements of the NYSE shall be deemed in compliance with the
provisions of Rule 3012. A dual member must comply with all of the
NYSE's substantially similar requirements to be considered in
compliance with Rule 3012. Accordingly, any dual member electing to
comply with the substantially similar requirements of the NYSE would
comply with Rule 3012's reporting requirement by completing the NYSE
Rule 342.30 Annual Report. The member, however, would still be
required to complete the report required by IM-3013 prior to the
initial certification date required by Rule 3013 and IM-3013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, NASD is filing this proposed rule change to address
those issues. Specifically, the proposed rule change will amend Rule
3012 to provide that a member may submit its initial Rule 3012 report
by no later than April 1, 2006. The proposed rule change explains that
due to Rule 3012's January 31, 2005 effective date, a member choosing
to rely on any date after January 31, 2005 through April 1, 2006 as the
submission deadline for its initial Rule 3012 report will have to
encompass the period from January 31, 2004 up to that submission date
(or a reasonable period of time immediately preceding the submission
date). Each ensuing Rule 3012 report must encompass the 12 months
following the previous Rule 3012 report (or such shorter time period if
a member elects to prepare a report more frequently than annually).
    Additionally, the proposed rule change will amend Rule 3013 and IM-
3013 to provide that a member may execute its first annual
certification by no later than April 1, 2006 and annually thereafter. A
member should keep in mind that the report required by IM-3013 that
evidences the member's processes must be prepared in advance of, but
reasonably close in time to, April 1, 2006.
    As a result of these proposed changes members will be able, if they
so choose, to combine the respective reports, provided the single
report clearly identifies and addresses all of the requirements set
forth in Rule 3012, Rule 3013 and IM-3013. The proposed rule change
will also allow dual members to comply with the respective reporting
requirements of Rule 3012, Rule 3013, IM-3013, and NYSE Rule 342.30
without undue duplication of effort.
    NASD has filed the proposed rule change for immediate effectiveness
and has requested that the Commission waive the 5-day pre-filing
requirement and the 30-day period for the proposed rule change to
become operative, in order to allow NASD members to have as much time
as possible to adjust their procedures to the new submission dates for
the initial Rule 3012 report and the initial certification required by
Rule 3013 and IM-3013. The effective date and the implementation date
will be the date of filing, October 14, 2005.
2. Statutory Basis
    NASD believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act, which requires, among other
things, that NASD rules must 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 synchronizing the date of the
report required by Rule 3012 and the date of execution of the
certification required by Rule 3013 and IM-3013 will reasonably serve
to minimize duplication of effort on the part of members, while still
ensuring the protection of investors.

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, as amended.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    The foregoing proposed rule change is subject to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \10\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder \11\
because the proposal (i) Does not significantly affect the protection
of investors or the public interest; (ii) does not impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) does not become operative
for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time
as the Commission may designate if consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest; provided that the self-regulatory
organization has given the Commission notice of its intent to file the
proposed rule change, along with a brief description of the text of the
proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of
filing of the

proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the
Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NASD has requested that the Commission waive the five-day pre-
filing requirement and the 30-day operative delay so that the proposed
rule change will become immediately effective upon filing. The
Commission believes that waiving the five-day pre-filing provision and
the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest.\12\ Waiving the pre-filing
requirement and accelerating the operative date will merely permit the
immediate implementation of changes that will allow firms to more
efficiently discharge their reporting obligations. For these reasons,
the Commission designates the proposed rule change as effective and
operative immediately.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ For purposes only of accelerating the operative date of
this proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's
impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such 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.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

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

File Number SR-NASD-2005-121 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-9303.

    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASD-2005-121. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,

all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street,
NE, Washington, DC 20549. 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 the File Number SR-NASD-2005-121 and should
be submitted on or before November 30, 2005.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 05-22335 Filed 11-8-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P