[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 87 (Monday, May 6, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19783-19785]
[FR Doc No: 2019-09221]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-0066; FRL-9992-10]

Petition To Modify the Tolerance and Product Labels for
Glyphosate With Regard to Oats; Notice of Filing

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is seeking public comment on a September 27, 2018 petition
from the Environmental Working Group (EWG), Ben & Jerry's Homemade,
Inc., Happy Family Organics, MegaFood, MOM's Organic Market, National
Co+op Grocers, Nature's Path Foods Inc., One Degree Organic Foods USA,
Inc., and Stonyfield Farms, Inc. requesting that the agency reduce the
tolerance of the pesticide glyphosate in or on oats and

require glyphosate-containing product labels to explicitly prohibit
preharvest use on oats. The petitioners have submitted this petition
under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) and the
Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and as comments for consideration
during the registration review of glyphosate under the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA).

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 5, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-0066, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html. Additional
instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along with more
information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Khue Nguyen, Pesticide Re-evaluation
Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-
0001; main telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of
interest to a wide range of stakeholders, including environmental,
human health, and agricultural advocates, the chemical industry,
pesticide users, agricultural producers, food manufacturers, pesticide
manufacturers, and members of the public interested in the sale,
distribution, or use of pesticides. 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. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When preparing and submitting
your comments, see the commenting tips at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html.
    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. What action is the Agency taking?

    EPA seeks public comment during the next 30 days on a pesticide
petition dated September 27, 2018 (available in docket number EPA-HQ-
OPP-2019-0066 at http://www.regulations.gov) from the EWG, Ben &
Jerry's Homemade, Inc., Happy Family Organics, MegaFood, MOM's Organic
Market, National Co+op Grocers, Nature's Path Foods Inc., One Degree
Organic Foods USA, Inc., and Stonyfield Farms, Inc. The petitioners
request that EPA reduce the glyphosate tolerance for oats from 30 parts
per million (ppm) to 0.1 ppm and prohibit preharvest use on oats. The
petition also requests that EPA require glyphosate-containing product
labels to explicitly prohibit the use of glyphosate as a preharvest
dessicant on oats. The petition is filed pursuant to section 408 of the
FFDCA and section 553(e) of the Administrative Procedures Act.
    As part of their petition, the petitioners have submitted results
of residue testing from the EWG of glyphosate levels in various
granola, instant oat, breakfast cereal, and snack commodities. The
petitioners claim that glyphosate is a possible carcinogen and that the
current 30 ppm glyphosate tolerance on oats is not adequately
protective of children. In addition, the petitioners request revisions
to glyphosate labels that they believe will reduce the potential for
children's dietary exposure to glyphosate in oat products.
    Background materials related to the FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel
(SAP) meeting to discuss the carcinogenic potential of glyphosate,
including the transcript, the March 16, 2017 ``Transmission of Meeting
Minutes and Final Report of the December 13-16, 2016 FIFRA SAP Meeting
Held to Consider and Review Scientific Issues Associated with EPA's
Evaluation of the Carcinogenic Potential of Glyphosate'', and EPA's
December 12, 2017 ``Response to the Final Report of the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act Scientific Advisory Panel
(FIFRA SAP) on the Evaluation of the Human Carcinogenic Potential of
Glyphosate'' are available online at: https://cfpub.epa.gov/si/si_public_record_Report.cfm?Lab=OPP&dirEntryId=337935.
    EPA's December 12, 2017 ``Revised Glyphosate Issue Paper:
Evaluation of Carcinogenic Potential, its December 12, 2017 Glyphosate
Draft Human Health Risk Assessment for Registration Review'', and its
September 8, 2015 ``Registration Review--Preliminary Ecological Risk
Assessment for Glyphosate and its Salts'' are available online at:
https://www.epa.gov/ingredients-used-pesticide-products/draft-human-health-and-ecological-risk-assessments-glyphosate. The Agency's
Proposed Interim Registration Review Decision for glyphosate is also
available for public comment in docket EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0361 at http://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: April 24, 2019.
Charles Smith,
Acting Director, Pesticide Re-evaluation Division, Office of Pesticide
Programs.
[FR Doc. 2019-09221 Filed 5-3-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: April 20, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 76)]
[Notices]
[Page 19999-20002]
[DOCID:fr20ap07-130]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-55635; File No. SR-ISE-2007-16]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange,
LLC; Notice of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of
Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, Relating to
Options Based on Commodity Pool ETFs

April 16, 2007.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'')\1\ and Rule 19b-4 \2\ thereunder, notice is hereby given that
on February 21, 2007, the International Securities Exchange, LLC
(``ISE'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I and II below, which Items have been substantially prepared by
the Exchange. On March 26, 2007, ISE filed Amendment No. 1 to the
proposed rule change.\3\ This order provides notice of the proposed
rule change as modified by Amendment No. 1 and approves the proposed
rule change on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Amendment No. 1 replaces and supersedes the original filing
in its entirety.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend certain rules to permit the listing
and trading of options on equity interests issued by trust issued
receipts (``TIRs''), partnership units (``Partnership Units''),\4\ and
other entities (referred collectively herein as ``Commodity Pool

ETFs'') that hold or invest in commodity futures products.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ As set forth in ISE Rule 2127, a ``Partnership Unit'' means
a security (a) that is issued by a partnership that invests in any
combination of futures contracts, options on futures contracts,
forward contracts, commodities and/or securities; and (b) that is
issued and redeemed daily in specified aggregate amounts at net
asset value.
    \5\ The proposal parallels one submitted by the American Stock
Exchange LLC (``Amex'') and recently approved by the Commission. See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55547 (March 28, 2007), 72 FR
16388 (April 4, 2007) (SR-Amex-2006-110).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the ISE, the
Commission's Public Reference Room, and http://www.iseoptions.com.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the ISE included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item III below. The ISE has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections
A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The proposed rule change is to enable the listing and trading on
the Exchange of options on interests in Commodity Pool ETFs that trade
directly or indirectly commodity futures products. As a result,
Commodity Pool ETFs are subject to the Commodity Exchange Act (the
``CEA'') due to their status as a commodity pool,\6\ and therefore,
regulated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (``CFTC'').\7\
Commodity Pool ETFs may hold or trade in one or more types of
investments that may include any combination of securities, commodity
futures contracts, options on commodity futures contracts, swaps, and
forward contracts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ A ``commodity pool'' is defined in CFTC Regulation
4.10(d)(1) as any investment trust, syndicate or similar form of
enterprise operated for the purpose of trading commodity interests.
CFTC regulations further provide that a ``commodity interest'' means
a commodity futures contract and any contract, agreement or
transaction subject to Commission regulation under Section 4c or 19
of the Act. See CFTC Regulation 4.10(a).
    \7\ The manager or operator of a ``commodity pool'' is required
to register, unless applicable exclusions apply, as a commodity pool
operator (CPO) and commodity trading advisor (CTA) with the CFTC and
become a member of the National Futures Association (``NFA'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, ISE Rule 502(h) provides securities deemed appropriate
for options trading shall include shares or other securities (``Fund
Shares'') that (i) Represent interests in registered investment
companies (or series thereof) organized as open-end management
investment companies, unit investment trusts or similar entities that
are traded on a national securities exchange or through the facilities
of a national securities association and are defined as an ``NMS
stock'' under Rule 600 of Regulation NMS, and that hold portfolios of
securities comprising or otherwise based on or representing investments
in broad-based indexes or portfolios of securities (or that hold
securities in one or more other registered investment companies that
themselves hold such portfolios of securities) or (ii) represent
interests in a trust that holds a specified non-U.S. currency deposited
with the trust when aggregated in some specified minimum number may be
surrendered to the trust by the beneficial owner to receive the
specified non-U.S. currency and pays the beneficial owner interest and
other distributions on the deposited non-U.S. currency, if any,
declared and paid by the trust (``Funds'').
    The Exchange proposes to amend its Rule 502(h) to expand the type
of options to include the listing and trading of options based on
shares of Commodity Pool ETFs (the ``Shares'') that may hold or invest
directly or indirectly in commodity futures products, including but not
limited to, commodity futures contracts, options on commodity futures
contracts, swaps, and forward contracts. As part of this revision, the
Exchange proposes to add paragraph (h)(6) to ISE Rule 502(h) requiring
that, for Commodity Pool ETFs, a comprehensive surveillance sharing
agreement be in place with the marketplace or marketplaces with last
sale reporting that represent(s) the highest volume in such commodity
futures contracts and/or options on commodity futures contracts on the
specified commodities or non-U.S. currency, which are utilized by the
national securities exchange where the underlying Commodity Pool ETFs
are listed and traded.
    As set forth in proposed ISE Rule 502(h), Commodity Pool ETFs must
be traded on a national securities exchange or through the facilities
of a national securities association and must be an ``NMS stock'' as
defined under Rule 600 of Regulation NMS. In addition, shares of
Commodity Pool ETFs must meet either: (i) The criteria and guidelines
under ISE Rule 502(b); or (ii) be available for creation or redemption
each business day in cash or in kind from the commodity pool, trust or
similar entity at a price related to net asset value. In addition, the
commodity pool, trust or other similar entity shall provide that shares
may be created even though some or all of the securities needed to be
deposited have not been received by the commodity pool, trust or other
similar entity, provided the authorized creation participant has
undertaken to deliver the shares as soon as possible and such
undertaking has been secured by the delivery and maintenance of
collateral consisting of cash or cash equivalents satisfactory to the
commodity pool, trust or other similar entity which underlies the
option as described in the prospectus.
    Under the applicable continued listing criteria in ISE Rule 503(h),
the Fund Shares approved for options trading will not be deemed to meet
the requirements for continued approval, and the Exchange will not open
for trading any additional series of options contracts of the class
covering such Fund Shares in any of the following circumstances: (i)
Following the initial twelve-month period beginning upon the
commencement of trading of the Fund Shares, there are fewer than 50
record and/or beneficial holders of the Fund Shares for 30 or more
consecutive trading days; (ii) the value of the index, non-U.S.
currency, portfolio of commodities including commodity futures
contracts, options on commodity futures contracts, swaps, forward
contracts and/or options on physical commodities, or portfolio of
securities on which the Fund Shares are based is no longer calculated
or available; or (iii) such other event occurs or condition exists that
in the opinion of the Exchange makes further dealing on the Exchange
inadvisable. Additionally, the Fund Shares shall not be deemed to meet
the requirements for continued approval, and the Exchange shall not
open for trading any additional series of option contracts of the class
covering such Fund Shares, if the Fund Shares are halted from trading
on their primary market or if the Fund Shares are delisted in
accordance with the terms of ISE Rule 503 or the value of the index or
portfolio on which the Fund Shares are based is no longer calculated or
available.
    The Exchange is also proposing to amend ISE Rule 408 to require
members to establish, maintain and enforce written policies and
procedures to prevent the misuse of material nonpublic information it
might have or receive in a related security, option or derivative or in
the applicable related commodity, commodity futures or options on
commodity futures or any other related commodity derivatives. The
Exchange is further proposing to amend ISE Rule 1400 to ensure that the
Primary Market Maker handling the Fund Shares provide the Exchange with

all necessary information relating to their trading in the applicable
physical commodities, physical commodity options, commodity futures
contracts, options on commodity futures contracts, any other
derivatives based on such commodity. The Exchange is also proposing to
amend Rule 807 to prohibit a Primary Market Maker engaging in physical
commodities, physical commodity options, commodity futures contracts,
options on commodity futures contracts, any other derivatives based on
such commodity from trading in an account which has not been reported
to the Exchange.
    The Exchange represents that it has an adequate surveillance
program in place for options based on Commodity Pool ETFs. The Exchange
may obtain trading information via the Intermarket Surveillance Group
(``ISG'') from other exchanges who are members or affiliates of the ISG
and has entered into numerous comprehensive surveillance sharing
agreements with various commodity futures exchanges worldwide. Prior to
listing and trading options on Commodity Pool ETFs, the Exchange
represents that it will either have the ability to obtain specific
trading information via ISG or through a comprehensive surveillance
sharing agreement with the exchange or exchanges where the particular
commodity futures and/or options on commodity futures are traded.
    The addition of Commodity Pool ETF options will not have any effect
on the rules pertaining to position and exercise limits \8\ or
margin.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See ISE Rules 412 and 414.
    \9\ See ISE Rule 1202.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This proposal is necessary to enable the Exchange to list and trade
options on an expanding range of Commodity Pool ETFs currently approved
for trading. The Exchange notes that The DB Commodity Index Tracking
Fund (the ``DBC Fund''), the United States Oil Fund, L.P. (the ``Oil
Fund'') and the PowerShares DB G10 Currency Harvest Fund (the ``DBV
Fund'') are listed and traded on the Amex.\10\ The DBC Fund is a
Commodity TIR and tracks the performance of the Deutsche Bank Liquid
Commodity IndexTM--Excess Return while the Oil Fund is a
Partnership Unit and tracks the spot price of West Texas Intermediate
light, sweet crude oil delivered to Cushing, Oklahoma.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 53105 (January 11,
2006), 71 FR 3129 (January 19, 2006) (approving the listing and
trading of the DB Commodity Index Tracking Fund); 53582 (March 31,
2006), 71 FR 17510 (April 6, 2006) (approving the listing and
trading of Units of the United States Oil Fund, L.P.); and 54450
(September 14, 2006), 71 FR 51245 (September 21, 2006) (approving
the listing and trading of the PowerShares DB G10 Currency Harvest
Fund).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The DBC Fund is a ``feeder fund'' that invests substantially all of
its assets in the DB Commodity Index Tracking Master Fund, and the
Master Fund in turn maintains a portfolio of exchange-traded futures on
aluminum, gold, corn, wheat, heating oil and light, sweet crude oil.
The Index is derived from the prices of those futures contracts. The
Master Fund's portfolio is managed on an ongoing basis by DB Commodity
Services LLC, a registered CPO and CTA, so that the value of the
portfolio closely tracks the value of the Index over time.
    The DBV Fund is a ``feeder fund'' that invests substantially all of
its assets in the PowerShares DB G10 Currency Harvest Master Fund, and
the Master Fund in turn maintains a portfolio of exchange-traded
futures on foreign currencies that comprise the G-10 countries. The
Index is derived from the prices of those futures contracts. The Master
Fund's portfolio is managed on an ongoing basis by DB Commodity
Services LLC, a registered CPO and CTA, so that the value of the
portfolio closely tracks the value of the Index over time.
    Unlike the DBC and DBV Funds, the Oil Fund does not invest through
a master-feeder structure but rather trades directly in futures on
crude and heating oil, natural gas, gasoline and other petroleum-based
fuels, options on such futures contracts, forward contracts on oil and
other over-the-counter derivatives based on the price of oil, other
petroleum-based fuels, the futures contracts described above, and the
indexes based on any of the foregoing. The Oil Fund's portfolio is
managed by Victoria Bay Asset Management LLC with the aim of tracking
the West Texas Intermediate light, sweet crude oil futures contract
listed and traded on the New York Mercantile Exchange (``NYMEX'').
    The ISE believes that it is reasonable to expect other types of
Commodity Pool ETFs to be introduced for trading in the near future.
The proposed amendment to the Exchange's listing criteria for options
on Commodity TIRs and Partnership Units is necessary to ensure that the
Exchange will be able to list options on Commodity Pool ETFs that have
been recently launched as well as any other similar Commodity Pool ETFs
that may be listed and traded in the future.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act \11\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5),\12\ of the Act in
particular, in that it would promote just and equitable principles of
trade, remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and
open market in a manner consistent with the protection of investors and
the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    The Exchange states that no written comments were solicited or
received with respect to the proposed rule change.

III. 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-ISE-2007-16 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-ISE-2007-16. 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 the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the ISE. All comments
received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit
personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit
only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2007-16 and should be
submitted on or before May 11, 2007.

IV. Commission Findings and Accelerated Approval

    After careful consideration, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the
rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities
exchange \13\ and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6 of the
Act.\14\ Specifically, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\15\ which
requires, among other things, that the rules of a national securities
exchange be designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade,
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market in a manner consistent with the protection of investors and the
public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Surveillance

    The Commission notes that Exchange has represented that it has an
adequate surveillance program in place for options based on Commodity
Pool ETFs. The Exchange may obtain trading information via the ISG from
other exchanges who are members or affiliates of the ISG and has
entered into numerous comprehensive surveillance sharing agreements
with various commodity futures exchanges worldwide. Prior to listing
and trading options on Commodity Pool ETFs, the Exchange represented
that it will either have the ability to obtain specific trading
information via ISG or through a comprehensive surveillance sharing
agreement with the exchange or exchanges where the particular commodity
futures and/or options on commodity futures are traded. In addition,
the Exchange represented that the addition of Commodity Pool ETF
options will not have any effect on the rules pertaining to position
and exercise limits \16\ or margin.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See ISE Rules 412 and 414.
    \17\ See ISE Rule 1202.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Listing and Trading of Options on Commodity Pool ETFs

    The Commission notes that, pursuant to the proposed rule change, a
Commodity Pool ETF will be subject to the provisions of ISE Rules 502
and 503, as applicable. These provisions include requirements regarding
initial and continued listing standards, the creation/redemption
process for Commodity Pool ETFs, and trading halts. All Commodity Pool
ETFs must be traded through a national securities exchange or through
the facilities of a national securities association, and must be ``NMS
stock'' as defined under Rule 600 of Regulation NMS. \18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 242.600(b)(47).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that this proposal is necessary to enable
the Exchange to list and trade options on an expanding range of
Commodity Pool ETFs currently approved for trading and that it is
reasonable to expect other types of Commodity Pool ETFs to be
introduced for trading in the future. This proposal would help ensure
that the Exchange will be able to list options on Commodity Pool ETFs
that have been recently launched as well as any other similar Commodity
Pool ETFs that may be listed and traded in the future \19\ thereby
offering investors greater option choices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Acceleration

    The Commission finds good cause, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of
the Act,\20\ for approving the proposed rule change, as amended, prior
to the thirtieth day after the date of publication of notice in the
Federal Register. The Commission notes that the proposal is consistent
with the Exchange's listing and trading standards in ISE Rules 502 and
503, and the Commission has recently approved a similar proposal, after
publishing it for comment and receiving no comments.\21\ Therefore, the
Commission does not believe that the proposed rule change, as amended,
raises novel regulatory issues. Consequently, the Commission believes
that it is appropriate to permit investors to benefit from the
flexibility afforded by trading these products as soon as possible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \21\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55547 (March 28,
2007), 72 FR 16388 (April 4, 2007) (SR-Amex-2006-110).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, the Commission finds that there is good cause,
consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\22\ to approve the
proposal, as amended, on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\23\ that the proposed rule change (SR-ISE-2007-16), as modified by
Amendment No. 1, be, and is hereby approved on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-7489 Filed 4-19-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 75 (Tuesday, April 19, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 21889]
[FR Doc No: 2011-9371]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

 [Docket No. RR11-1-000; Docket No. RR11-1-001]

Nebraska Public Power District; Southwest Power Pool Regional
Entity; Notice of Extension of Time

    On April 8, 2011, the Midwest Reliability Organization (MRO) filed
a motion for an extension of time to file comments in connection with
the March 18, 2011 Petition of Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD
Petition) in Docket No RR11-1-000. In its motion, MRO notes that on
March 21, 2010 the Commission issued a formal notice of the NPPD
Petition establishing a comment deadline of April 18, 2011. MRO also
notes that the Southwest Power Pool Regional Entity filed a petition
(SPP RE Petition) on March 31, 2010 in Docket No. RR11-1-001 and that
the Commission issued a formal notice of the SPP RE Petition
establishing a comment deadline on April 21, 2011, which is three days
after responses are due to the NPPD Petition. MRO states that the NPPD
Petition and the SPP RE Petition stem from a common set of facts, and
SPP RE's Petition raises issues that are very similar to those in the
NPPD Petition. MRO also states that the current three day difference
between the comment deadlines for each petition creates the potential
for procedural unfairness and prejudice to MRO, as well as any other
prospective participant who may oppose both petitions.
    Upon consideration, notice is hereby given that an extension of
time for filing motions to intervene and comments concerning the NPPD
Petition is granted to and including April 21, 2011.

    Dated: April 13, 2011.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-9371 Filed 4-18-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 98 (Friday, May 20, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 31862-31864]
[FR Doc No: 2016-11826]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2016-0026]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone, Block Island Wind Farm; Rhode Island Sound, RI

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a 500-yard safety zone around
each of five locations where the Block Island Wind Farm (BIWF) wind
turbine generator (WTG) towers, nacelles, blades and subsea cables will
be installed in the navigable waters of Rhode Island Sound, RI, from
May 15 to October 31, 2016. These safety zones are intended to
safeguard mariners from the hazards associated with construction of the
BIWF. This regulation prohibits vessels from entering into, transiting
through, mooring, or anchoring within these safety zones while
construction vessels and associated equipment are working on-site
(i.e., within 500 yards of a WTG) at one or more of the BIWF WTG sites,
unless authorized by the Captain of the Port (COTP), Southeastern New
England or the COTP's designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective without actual notice from May 20, 2016
through October 31, 2016. For purposes of enforcement, actual notice
will be used from May 15, 2016 until May 20, 2016.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2016-0026 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this rule,
call or email Mr. Edward G. LeBlanc, Chief of the Waterways Management
Division at Coast Guard Sector Southeastern New England, telephone 401-
435-2351, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Acronyms

BIWF Block Island Wind Farm
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of The Port
DHS Department of Homeland Security
DWW Deepwater Wind
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
NTM Notice To Mariners
RIDEM Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management
Sec.  Section
TFR Temporary Final Rule
U.S.C. United States Code
WTG Wind Turbine Generator

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    On February 16, 2016, the Coast Guard published an NPRM in the
Federal Register titled Safety Zone, Block Island Wind Farm; Rhode
Island Sound, RI, 81 FR 7718, proposing to create BIWF safety zones
effective April 1, 2016. There we stated why we issued the NPRM, and
invited comments on our proposed regulatory action related to BIWF
construction. Two comments were received requesting an extension of the
initial comment period that ended on March 17, 2016. On April 4, 2016,
we published a Proposed Rule in the Federal Register, 81 FR 19097,
opening a second comment period that closed on April 17, 2016.
    We are issuing this rule, and under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast
Guard finds that good cause exists for making it effective less than 30
days after publication in the Federal Register. The original effective
date of the safety zones created by this rule was April 1, 2016. The
revised date is six weeks later, May 15, 2016. Construction and cable-
laying vessels are already preparing to work in the vicinity of the
BIWF. The safety of life and navigation for construction and support
vessels, BIWF workers, mariners, and the boating public during
construction activities in the vicinity of the BIWF in Rhode Island
Sound, RI would be negatively impacted by a delay in the effective date
of this TFR.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C.
1231. The COTP Southeastern New England has determined that potential
hazards associated with construction of the BIWF from May 15 to October
31, 2016 will be a safety concern for anyone within a 500-yard radius
of any of the five WTG sites when and where construction vessels are
present. The purpose of this rule is to ensure safety of vessels and
the navigable waters in the safety zone during this construction
period.

IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes, and the Rule

    Twelve comments were received. As noted above, the Coast Guard
provided two distinct periods for the public to submit comments. The
first comment period, announced in our NPRM published in the Federal
Register on February 16, 2016, (81 FR 7718) was from February 16 to
March 17, 2016. The second comment period, announced in our Proposed
Rule published in the Federal Register on April 4, 2016, (81 FR 19097)
was from April 4-17, 2016. We received nine comments in the initial
comment period. Two requested additional time to submit comments.
    Three comments supported the safety zones proposed in the NPRM. One
comment suggested that the Coast Guard also prohibit anchoring outside
the safety zone areas. Another comment

suggested extending the effective dates of the TFR to allow for
construction delays. A third comment suggested that measures be
implemented to prevent vessels near the safety zones from drifting into
the safety zones.
    Four comments opposed the safety zones, claiming the zones will
cause irreparable economic harm to commercial fishing interest that
normally fish in the vicinity of the BIWF unless adequately compensated
by Deepwater Wind (DWW), the developers of the BIWF.
    Three comments were received during the second comment period. One
comment supported the safety zones as a necessary safety measure with
minimal adverse environmental impacts. Two comments requested
clarification of our NPRM. The Rhode Island Department of Environmental
Management (RIDEM) asked us to clarify that the safety zones are 500
yards in radius centered on each BIWF WTG, not 500 yards diameter. The
safety zones created by this TFR are five individual safety zones, each
500 yards in radius centered on each BIWF WTG. RIDEM and another
comment also requested that we confirm that each safety zone will only
be enforced (i.e., entry to non-construction vessels will be
prohibited) when construction vessels are on-site (within 500 yards of
a WTG). DWW intends to have vessels on site at only one or two WTG
sites simultaneously, not all five concurrently. As written, this TFR
will be enforced at each WTG site only when BIWF construction vessels
are on-site at a particular WTG. For example, if BIWF construction
vessels are at WTG site 1, vessels must remain at least 500 yards from
WTG 1. But vessels may approach WTGs 2-5 as close as desired that is
consistent with prudent seamanship and navigation safety. As another
example, if BIWF construction vessels are at WTG sites 3 and 4, then
waters at sites 1, 2, and 5 are completely accessible to mariners, and
so on.
    Additionally, RIDEM requested that the Coast Guard consult with DWW
to reduce the effective period of the safety zones created by this TFR
to ``minimize economic hardship on members of the RI fishing
industry.'' The Coast Guard consulted DWW on April 19, 2016 to discuss
the length of the effective period. This TFR shortens the effective
period by six weeks and clarifies that the safety zones will only be
enforced at those individual WTG sites where construction vessels are
on-scene, not all five sites simultaneously, which minimizes the times
and areas that may impact the RI fishing industry.
    RIDEM also requested that five days public notice be provided to
inform the public of the specific WTG(s) at which construction
activities would be taking place. DWW publishes a daily mariner
notification at http://dwwind.com/biwf-construction/, which will
include a 5-day forecast of locations of construction vessels and
activities. Additionally, RIDEM has a fishery liaison officer whose
duties included keeping the RI fishing community advised of BIWF
construction activities.
    The Coast Guard considered all these comments and provided the
clarification above, but otherwise made no changes to the regulatory
text of this rule from the proposed rule in the NPRM, other than to
change the commencement date of the effective period of the TFR from
April 1 to May 15, 2016.
    This rule establishes a 500-yard safety zone around each of five
locations where the BIWF WTG towers, nacelles, blades, and subsea
cables will be installed in the navigable waters of the Rhode Island
Sound, RI, from May 15 to October 31, 2016.
    These safety zones are intended to safeguard mariners from the
hazards associated with construction of the BIWF. These safety zones
are also of similar dimensions and duration as safety zones established
in 2015 for the same purpose, during the first phase of construction of
the BIWF. Vessels will be prohibited from entering into, transiting
through, mooring, or anchoring within these safety zones at only those
WTG sites where construction vessels and associated equipment are
present unless authorized by the COTP, Southeastern New England or the
COTP's designated representative.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we
discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive order 13563 emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing
rules, and of promoting flexibility. This rule has not been designated
a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive order 12866.
Accordingly, it has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and
Budget.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
location, duration, and the time-of-day of the safety zones. The safety
zones are 500 yards in radius, centered on each of five WTG locations,
and enforced at those WTG sites where construction vessels or
construction activities are taking place. Also, construction of the
five WTG sites is sequential, not concurrent, so that construction
vessels and activities (and hence, safety zones) are present at only
one or two sites at any given time. Vessels will be able to safely
transit around these safety zones. The Coast Guard will publicize these
safety zones in advance via the Local Notice to Mariners Deepwater Wind
will update its Web site daily to keep mariners informed of what safety
zones, if any, may be enforced. Lastly, safety zones of the same size
and duration were implemented for the first phase of the BIWF
construction in 2015 with no significant impact to mariners or small
entities.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard received no comments from the Small Business
Administration on this rulemaking. The Coast Guard certifies under 5
U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit
these safety zones may be small entities, for the reasons stated in
section V.A above this rule would not have a significant economic
impact on any vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.

    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive order
13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section above.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule would not result
in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined
that this action is one of a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. This rule involves safety zones that would prohibit entry
within 500 yards of each WTG site of the BIWF while construction
vessels and associated equipment are present at that particular WTG. It
is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of
Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. An environmental analysis
checklist supporting this determination and a Categorical Exclusion
Determination will be available in the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental impact from this rule.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places, or vessels.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for Part 165 reads as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-
1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T0026 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T0026  Safety Zone, Block Island Wind Farm; Rhode Island
Sound, RI

    (a) Location. Areas within a 500-yard radius of the following five
positions are safety zones:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Platform                   Latitude            Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
WTG 1.........................  41[deg]7'32.74'' N.   71[deg]30'27.04''
                                                      W.
WTG 2.........................  41[deg]7'11.57'' N.  71[deg]30'50.22''
                                                      W.
WTG 3.........................  41[deg]6'52.96'' N.  71[deg]31'16.18''
                                                      W.
WTG 4.........................  41[deg]6'36.54'' N.  71[deg]31'44.62''
                                                      W.
WTG 5.........................  41[deg]6'22.79'' N.  71[deg]32'15.50''
                                                      W.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b) Enforcement period. From May 15 to October 31, 2016, vessels
will be prohibited from entering into these safety zones, when
enforced, during construction activity of the five Block Island Wind
Farm (BIWF) wind turbine generators (WTG) located in the positions
listed in 2(a) above.
    (c) Definitions. The following definitions apply to this section:
    Designated Representative. A ``designated representative'' is any
Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer of the U.S. Coast
Guard who has been designated by the Captain of the Port, Sector
Southeastern New England (COTP), to act on his or her behalf.
    (d) Regulations. (1) The general regulations contained in 33 CFR
165.23 as well as the following regulations apply to the safety zones
established in conjunction with the construction of the BIWF; Rhode
Island Sound, RI. These regulations may be enforced for the duration of
construction.
    (2) Vessels must not enter into, transit through, moor, or anchor
in these safety zones during periods of enforcement unless authorized
by the COTP, Southeastern New England or the COTP's designated
representative. Vessels permitted to transit must operate at a no-wake
speed, in a manner which will not endanger construction vessels or
associated equipment.
    (3) Failure to comply with a lawful direction from the COTP,
Southeastern New England or the COTP's designated representative may
result in expulsion from the area, citation for failure to comply, or
both.

    Dated: April 21, 2016.
J.T. Kondratowicz,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Southeastern New
England.
[FR Doc. 2016-11826 Filed 5-19-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P