[Federal Register: September 26, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 186)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 54569-54574]
[DOCID:fr26se07-15]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0206; FRL-8147-4]

Sulfosulfuron; Pesticide Tolerance

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
sulfosulfuron in or on grass, forage, fodder, and hay group 17, forage,
and grass, forage, fodder, and hay, group 17, hay. This regulation also
increases tolerances for fat, meat, and meat by byproducts of cattle,
goat, horse, and sheep, and milk. Monsanto Company requested this
tolerance under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

DATES: This regulation is effective September 26, 2007. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before November 26, 2007,
and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40
CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0206. To access the
electronic docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, select ``Advanced

Search,'' then ``Docket Search.'' Insert the docket ID number where
indicated and select the ``Submit'' button. Follow the instructions on
the regulations.gov website to view the docket index or access
available documents. All documents in the docket are listed in the
docket index available in regulations.gov. Although listed in the
index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on

the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are available in the electronic
docket at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard

copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac
Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The Docket
Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility telephone number is (703)
305-5805.

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

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

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

B. How Can I Access Electronic Copies of this Document?

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

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

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

C. Can I File an Objection or Hearing Request?

    Under section 408(g) of FFDCA, any person may file an objection to
any aspect of this regulation and may also request a hearing on those
objections. You must file your objection or request a hearing on this
regulation in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part
178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0206 in the subject line on the first page of
your submission. All requests must be in writing, and must be mailed or
delivered to the Hearing Clerk as required by 40 CFR part 178 on or
before November 26, 2007.
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing that does not contain any CBI for inclusion in the public
docket that is described in ADDRESSES. Information not marked
confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA
without prior notice. Submit this copy, identified by docket ID number
EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0206, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.

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

II. Petition for Tolerance

    In the Federal Register of July 14, 2006 (71 FR 40106) (FRL-8057-
7), EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP
6F7031) by Monsanto Company, 1300 I St., NW., Suite 450 East,
Washington, DC 20005. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.552 be
amended by establishing a tolerance for residues of the herbicide
sulfosulfuron, 1-(4,6-dimethoxypyrimidin-2-yl)-3-[(2-ethane-sulfonyl-
imidazo[1,2-a]pyridine-3-yl)sulfonyl]urea, and its metabolites
converted to 2-(ethylsulfonyl)imidazol[1,2-a]pyridine and calculated at
sulfosulfuron, in or on grass, forage at 13.0 parts per million (ppm);
grass, hay at 14 ppm; milk at 0.02 ppm; fat of cattle, goat, horse, and
sheep at 0.03 ppm; meat of cattle, goat, horse, and sheep at 0.01 ppm;
and meat byproducts of cattle, goat, horse, and sheep at 0.4 ppm. .
That notice referenced a summary of the petition prepared by Monsanto
Company, the registrant, which is available to the public in the
docket, http://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received in

response to the notice of filing.
    Based upon review of the data supporting the petition and Agency
procedures concerning commodity names, the Agency is correcting the
terminology and tolerance level for pending crops under 40 CFR 180.552
(a) as follows: Grass, forage, fodder and hay, group 17, forage at 14
ppm; grass, forage, fodder and hay, group 17, hay at 25 ppm; cattle,
fat at 0.02 ppm; cattle, meat at 0.01; cattle, meat byproducts at 0.30;
goat, fat at 0.02 ppm; goat, meat at 0.01 ppm; goat, meat byproducts at
0.30; horse, fat at 0.02 ppm; horse, meat at 0.01 ppm; horse, meat
byproducts at 0.30; milk at 0.02; sheep, fat at 0.02 ppm; sheep, meat
at 0.01 ppm; and sheep; meat byproducts at 0.30 ppm. These entries will
replace current entries for cattle, fat; cattle, meat; cattle, meat
byproduct; goat, fat; goat, meat; goat, meat byproducts, horse, fat;
horse, meat; horse; meat byproduct; milk; sheep; fat; sheep, meat; and
sheep, meat byproducts listed in paragraphs 40 CFR 180. 552(a) and (b).
The current entries listed in 180.552 (b) for bahiagrass, forage at 11
ppm; bahiagrass, hay at 40 ppm; bermudagrass, forage at 11 ppm; and
bermudagrass, hay at 40 ppm are replaced by the entries for grass,
forage, fodder and hay, group 27, forage at 14 ppm; and grass, forage,
fodder and hay, group 17, hay at 25 ppm in 40 CFR 180.552 (a).

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. . .
.'' These provisions were added to FFDCA by the Food Quality Protection
Act (FQPA) of 1996.
    Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, and the factors
specified in section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, EPA has reviewed the
available scientific data and other relevant information in support of
this action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to
make a determination on aggregate exposure for the petitioned-for
tolerance for residues of sulfosulfuron on grass, forage, fodder and
hay, group 17, forage at 14 ppm; grass, forage, fodder and hay, group
17, hay at 25 ppm; cattle, fat 0.02 ppm; cattle, meat at 0.01; cattle,
meat byproducts at 0.3; goat, fat at 0.02 ppm; goat, meat at 0.01 ppm;
goat, meat byproducts at 0.3; horse, fat at 0.02 ppm; horse, meat at
0.01 ppm; horse, meat byproducts at 0.3; milk at 0.02; sheep, fat at
0.02 ppm; sheep, meat at 0.01 ppm; and sheep; meat byproducts at 0.3
ppm. EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with
establishing the tolerance follows.

A. Toxicological Profile

    EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children. Specific information on the studies received and the nature
of the adverse effects caused by sulfosulfuron as well as the no-
observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-
effect-level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies are discussed in the
final rule published in the Federal Register of May 19, 1999 (64 FR
27186 (FRL-6078-4).

B. Toxicological Endpoints

    For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, the toxicological level of concern is derived from
the highest dose at which no adverse effects are observed in the
toxicology study identified as appropriate for use in risk assessment.
However, if a NOAEL cannot be determined, the lowest dose at which
adverse effects of concern are identified is sometimes used for risk
assessment. Uncertainty/safety factors (UFs) are used in conjunction
with the LOC to take into account uncertainties inherent in the
extrapolation from laboratory animal data to humans and in the
variations in sensitivity among members of the human population as well
as other unknowns. Safety is assessed for acute and chronic risks by
comparing aggregate exposure to the pesticide to the acute population
adjusted dose (aPAD) and chronic population adjusted dose (cPAD). The
aPAD and cPAD are calculated by dividing the LOC by all applicable UFs.
Short-term, intermediate-term, and long-term risks are evaluated by
comparing aggregate exposure to the LOC to ensure that the margin of
exposure (MOE) called for by the product of all applicable UFs is not
exceeded.
    For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes that any amount of
exposure will lead to some degree of risk and estimates risk in terms
of the probability of occurrence of additional adverse cases.
Generally, cancer risks are considered non-threshold. For more
information on the general principles EPA uses in risk characterization
and a complete description of the risk assessment process, see http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/1997/November/Day-26/p30948.htm
.

    A summary of the toxicological endpoints for sulfosulfuron used for
human risk assessment is discussed in Unit IV.A. of the final rule
published in the Federal Register of November 16, 2005 (70 FR 69457)
(FRL-7740-1)

C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to sulfosulfuron, EPA considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all existing sulfosulfuron
tolerances in (40 CFR 180.552). EPA assessed dietary exposures from
sulfosulfuron in food as follows:
    i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk
assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological
study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring
as a result of a 1-day or single exposure.
    No such effects were identified in the toxicological studies for
sulfosulfuron; therefore, a quantitative acute dietary exposure
assessment is unnecessary.
    ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the Unired States
Department of Agriculture (USDA) 1994-1996, or 1998 Continuing Survey
of Food Intake by Individuals (CSFII). As to residue levels in food,
EPA assumed all foods for which there are tolerances were treated and
contain tolerance-level residues and Dietary Exposure Evalutation Model
(DEEM) (version 7.76) default processing factors.
    iii. Cancer. In accordance with the Agency's Proposed Guidelines
for Carcinogenic Risk Assessment (April 10, 1996), the CARC classified
sulfosulfuron as a likely human carcinogen. The weight-of-evidence for
this classification are as follows:
     Occurrence of rare transitional cell papilloma and
cancinoma of urinary bladder in female rats.
     Occurrence of rare benign mesenchymal tumors of the
urinary bladder in high dose male as well as renal adenomas in female
and possibly male mice.
     The relevancy of the observed tumors to human exposure.
The Agency determined that a linear low-dose approach (Q 1*) for human
risk characterization and extrapolation of risk should be based on the
incidence of benign mesenchymal tumors in male mice. The rat
transitional tumors and mouse renal tumors were not used because of
their low incidence. This extrapolation, rather than an MOE approach is
supported by the lack of sufficient data to characterize the mechanism
of carcinogencity. The unit risk, Q 1* milligram/kilogram/day (mg/kg/
day)-1 of sulfosulfuron based upon male mouse
urinary bladder mescenchmal tumor rates is 1.03 X
10-3 (mg/kg/day)-1 in human
equivalents. The cancer dietary analysis assumed tolerance level
residues, 100% CT and DEEM (version 7.76) default processing factors.
    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water.The Agency lacks sufficient
monitoring data to complete a comprehensive dietary exposure analysis
and risk assessment for

sulfosulfuron in drinking water. Because the Agency does not have
comprehensive monitoring data, drinking water concentration estimates
are made by reliance on simulation or modeling taking into account data
on the environmental fate characteristics of sulfosulfuron. Further
information regarding EPA drinking water models used in pesticide
exposure assessment can be found at http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm
.

    Based on the First Index Reservoir Screening Tool (FIRST) and
Screening Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-GROW) models, the
estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of sulfosulfuron for
acute exposures are estimated to be 10.41 parts per billion (ppb) for
surface water and 2.6 ppb for ground water. The EWDCs for chronic
exposures are estimated to be 1.12 ppb for surface water and 2.6 ppb
for ground water.
    Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of value 2.6 ppb was used to access
the contribution to drinking water.
    3. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is
used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary
exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control,
termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets).
    Residential exposure is not expected for the new proposed uses.
However sulfosulfuron is registered for use on turf. Residential
homeowners are not expected to handle sulfosulfuron directly. However,
sulfosulfuron is applied by professional commercial operators to lawn
areas (such as apartment complexes, parks, schools, recreational areas
and public areas) where residents would come into contact with
sulfosulfuron residues. Therefore, as a part of a previous risk
assessment for this herbicide, post application exposure and risk to
residents (adults and children) were assessed. Post-application
inhalation exposure to children is considered to be negligible. Non-
dietary, incidental ingestion of residues from treated turfgrass and
ingestion of contaminated soil are possible. To address the short-term
residential risk to children from incidental oral exposure, the Agency
used the NOAEL of 24 mg/kg/day from the combined chronic toxicity/
carcinogenicity study in rats. This NOAEL is considered conservative
and health protective for this assessment because it represents the
lowest NOAEL in most sensitive species (the basis for the Chronic
Reference Dose (cRfD)). Agency SOPs for Residential Exposure
Assessments (Draft, December 18, 1997) were used as a guideline for
performing the residential post-application exposure (with amendments,
2001). Children's hand-to-mouth, object to mouth (turfgrass) and soil
ingestion were assessed. As discussed above, there are no residential
handler uses for sulfosulfuron. Therefore, the residential cancer
assessment for adults considered post-application only. Cancer risk for
residential adults was calculated based on high activity on treated
lawns. A transfer coefficient (TC) of 1,000 cm\2\/hr was used. Several
conservative assumptions are built into the assessment of residential
cancer risk. These include fifty years of exposure and an estimated 20%
of foliar residues being dislodgeable (DFRs) from turf, which is
derived from the maximum application rate. An average of 14 days of
DFRs were used for this cancer assessment, this would be considered a
10% decrease each day (from dilution by rain, and mowing or grass) of
the 20% residue for at least 14 days, and then taking the mean value of
this 14-day exposure. It should be noted that the current default DFR
is 5% from turf. At the time of the last risk assessment, the Agency
assumed 20% DFR as a default. As a result, the estimate of residential
adult risk is more conservative than it would be otherwise. The
Lifetime Average Daily Dose (LADD) = 6.0 X 10-5
mg/kg/day for a TC of 1,000 cm\2\/hr (high exposure activity for 1
hour).
    4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
    Unlike other pesticides for which EPA has followed a cumulative
risk approach based on a common mechanism of toxicity, EPA has not made
a common mechanism of toxicity finding as to sulfosulfuron and any
other substances and sulfosulfuron does not appear to produce a toxic
metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has not assumed that sulfosulofuron
has a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances. For
information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which chemicals have a
common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the cumulative effects of
such chemicals, see EPA's website at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative
.

D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

    1. In general. Section 408 of FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply
an additional (``10X'') tenfold margin of safety for infants and
children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal and
postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity and
exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a different
margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This additional
margin of safety is commonly referred to as the FQPA safety factor. In
applying this provision, EPA either retains the default value of 10X
when reliable data do not support the choice of a different factor, or,
if reliable data are available, EPA uses a different additional FQPA
safety factor value based on the use of traditional UFs and/or special
FQPA safety factors, as appropriate.
    2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. The developmental studies in
rat and rabbit and the reproductive study in rats did not indicate
increased susceptibility of rats or rabbits in utero and/or postnatal
exposure.
    3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show that it
would be safe for infants and children to reduce the FQPA safety factor
to 1X. That decision is based on the following findings:
    i. The toxicity database for sulfosulfuron is complete.
    ii. There is no indication that sulfosulfuron is a neurotoxic
chemical and there is no need for a developmental neurotoxicity study
or additional UFs to account for neurotoxicity.
    iii. There is no evidence that sulfosulfuron results in increased
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal
developmental studies or in young rats in the 2-generation reproduction
study.
    iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based
on 100% CT and tolerance-level residues Conservative ground water and
surface water modeling estimates were used. Similarly conservative
Residential SOPs were used to assess post-application exposure to
children as well as incidental oral exposure of toddlers. These
assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by
sulfosulfuron.

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety.

    Safety is assessed for acute and chronic risks by comparing
aggregate exposure to the pesticide to the aPAD and cPAD. The aPAD and
cPAD are calculated by dividing the LOC by all applicable UFs. For
linear cancer risks, EPA calculates the probability of additional
cancer cases given aggregate exposure. Short-term, intermediate-term,
and long-term risks are evaluated by comparing aggregate exposure to
the LOC to ensure that the MOE called for by the product of all
applicable UFs is not exceeded.
    1. Acute risk. An endpoint was not selected for acute dietary risk
assessment because there were no effects attributable to a single dose
(exposure) observed in oral toxicology studies (including developmental
toxicity studies in the rat and rabbit (at or up to 1,000 mg/kg/day))
and an acute neurotoxicity study in rat (at or up to 2, 000 mg/kg/day).
The acute oral toxicity of sulfosulfuron is also very low. Therefore,
sulfosulfuron is not expected to pose an acute risk.
    2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that exposure to
sulfosulfuron from food and water will utilize < 1% of the cPAD for all
population subgroups including infants and children. Based the use
pattern, chronic residential exposure to residues of sulfosulfuron is
not expected.
    3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into
account residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background exposure level).
    Sulfosulfuron is currently registered for use(s) that could result
in short-term residential exposure and the Agency has determined that
it is appropriate to aggregate chronic food and water and short-term
exposures for sulfosulfuron.
    Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for short-
term exposures, EPA has concluded that food, water, and residential
exposures aggregated result in an aggregate MOE of 1,300 for children
1-2 years old.
    4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level).
    Though residential exposure could occur no toxicological effects
have been identified for intermediate-term toxicity. Therefore, the
aggregate risk is the sum of the risk from food and water.
    5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. The cancer aggregate
risk assessment considered exposure from food, water, and residential
sources. EPA performs cancer assessments for the general U.S.
population only. The cancer dietary analyses assumed tolerance level
residues, 100% CT, and DEEM (version 7.76) default processing factors.
The dietary cancer risk from drinking water and food for the U.S.
population was 3 X 10-7. Residential cancer risk
was estimated for adults only based on dermal exposure to treated
areas. The estimated cancer risk for adults on day zero, based on high-
exposure activity for one hour (Tc=1,000 cm\2\/hr) is estimated to be
1.2 X 10-7. The aggregate cancer risk estimate
for adults is 3 X 10-7. If childhood incidental
oral exposure from residential sources is included in the aggregate
cancer risk assessment, the estimated cancer risk is 4 X
10-7. Since the cancer risk is less than the
negligible risk level of risks in the range of or below 1 X
10-6, EPA does not have a concern for aggregate
cancer risk from sulfosulfuron.
    6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, 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 sulfosulfuron residues.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    In support of the use on wheat, the petitioner proposed two common-
moiety high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) methods with
fluorescence detection for enforcement of tolerances in wheat and
livestock commodities. For grasses the company used a common moiety
liquid chromatograph/mass spectrometry/mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS)
method. The validated limit of quantitation (LOQ) was 0.005 and the
limit of detection (LOD) was 0.0026. The revision of the original HPLC
enforcement method to use LC/MC detection resolves the previous
deficiencies related to the specificity and confirmatory method. These
deficiencies are no longer outstanding.
    Adequate enforcement methodology LC/MS/MS is available to enforce
the tolerance expression. The method may be requested from: Chief,
Analytical Chemistry Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes
Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755-5350; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
B. International Residue Limits

    There are no established or proposed Codex or Mexican maximum
residue limits (MRLs) for residues of sulfosulfuron in grasses or
wheat. There are no established Canadian MRLs for residues of
sulfosulfuron in grasses. A Canadian MRL has been established for
residues of sulfosulfuron in wheat.

V. Conclusion

    Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of
sulfosulfuron, 1-(4,6-dimethoxypyrimidin-2-yl)-3-[(2-ethane-sulfonyl-
imidazo[1,2-a]pyridine-3-yl)sulfonyl]urea, and its metabolites
converted to 2-(ethylsulfonyl)imidazol[1,2-a]pyridine and calculated at
sulfosulfuorn, as discussed in Unit II.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This final rule establishes a tolerance under section 408(d) of
FFDCA in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and
Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this rule has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this rule is not
subject to Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355,
May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled Protection of Children
from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April
23, 1997). This final rule does not contain any information collections
subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq., nor does it require any special considerations
under Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under section 408(d) of FFDCA, such as the tolerance in
this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.) do not apply.
    This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions

of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR
67249, November 6, 2000) do not apply to this rule. In addition, This
rule does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded
mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (UMRA) (Public Law 104-4).
    This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272
note).

VII. Congressional Review Act

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

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

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

    Dated: September 13, 2007.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

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

PART 180--[AMENDED]

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

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

0
2. Section 180.552 is amended by revising the table in paragraph (a),
and by removing the text and reserving paragraph (b) to read as
follows:

Sec.  180.552  Sulfosulfuron; tolerances for residues.

    (a) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Commodity                        Parts per million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cattle, fat.........................                                0.02
Cattle, meat........................                                0.01
Cattle, meat byproducts.............                                 0.3
Goat, fat...........................                                0.02
Goat, meat..........................                                0.01
Goat, meat byproducts...............                                 0.3
Grass, forage, fodder and hay, group                                  14
 17, forage.........................
Grass, forage, fodder and hay, group                                  25
 17, hay............................
Hog, fat............................                               0.005
Hog, meat...........................                               0.005
Hog, meat byproducts................                                0.05
Horse, fat..........................                                0.02
Horse, meat.........................                                0.01
Horse, meat byproducts..............                                 0.3
Milk................................                                0.02
Sheep, fat..........................                                0.02
Sheep, meat.........................                                0.01
Sheep, meat byproducts..............                                 0.3
Wheat, forage.......................                                 4.0
Wheat, grain........................                                0.02
Wheat, hay..........................                                 0.3
Wheat, straw                                                         0.1
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. [Reserved]
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E7-18864 Filed 9-25-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 206 (Wednesday, October 24, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65025-65028]
[FR Doc No: 2012-26163]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 30235; 812-14012]

Trust for Professional Managers and Collins Capital Investments,
LLC; Notice of Application

October 18, 2012.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').

ACTION: Notice of an application under section 6(c) of the Investment
Company Act of 1940 (``Act'') for an exemption from section 15(a) of
the Act and rule 18f-2 under the Act, as well as from certain
disclosure requirements.

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

Summary of Application: Applicants request an order that would permit
them to enter into and materially amend subadvisory agreements without
shareholder approval and that would grant relief from certain
disclosure requirements.

Applicants: Trust for Professional Managers (the ``Trust'') and Collins
Capital Investments, LLC (the ``Advisor'') (collectively,
``Applicants'').

Filing Dates: The application was filed March 7, 2012, and amended on
June 26, 2012 and October 18, 2012.

Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An order granting the application
will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing. Interested
persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's Secretary
and serving applicants with a copy of the request, personally or by
mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by 5:30
p.m. on November 13, 2012, and should be accompanied by proof of
service on the applicants, in the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers,
a certificate of service. Hearing requests should state

the nature of the writer's interest, the reason for the request, and
the issues contested. Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing may
request notification by writing to the Commission's Secretary.

ADDRESSES: Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. Applicants:
Joseph C. Neuberger, 615 East Michigan Street, Milwaukee, WI 53202;
Kent A. Windhorst, Collins Capital Investments, LLC, 806 Douglas Road,
Suite 570, Coral Gables, FL 33134.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jaea F. Hahn, Senior Counsel, at (202)
551-6870 or Janet M. Grossnickle, Assistant Director, at<PHONE_NUMBER>
(Division of Investment Management, Office of Investment Company
Regulation).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is a summary of the
application. The complete application may be obtained via the
Commission's Web site by searching for the file number, or an applicant
using the Company name box, at http://www.sec.gov/search/search.htm or
by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Applicants' Representations:
    1. The Trust, a Delaware statutory trust, is registered under the
Act as an open-end management investment company. The Trust is
organized as a series investment company and currently consists of 27
series, one of which is advised by the Advisor.\1\ The Applicants are
not requesting relief for any series other than those advised by the
Advisor. The Advisor is a limited liability company organized under
Delaware law. The Advisor is, and any future Advisor will be,
registered as an investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act
of 1940 (``Advisers Act''). The Advisor serves as the investment
adviser to each Series pursuant to an investment advisory agreement
with the Trust (each an ``Advisory Agreement'' and collectively, the
``Advisory Agreements'').\2\ Each Advisory Agreement was approved or
will be approved by the board of trustees of the Trust (the ``Board''),
including a majority of the trustees who are not ``interested
persons,'' as defined in section 2(a)(19) of the Act, of the Trust, the
Fund, or the Advisor (``Independent Trustees'') and by the shareholders
of the relevant Fund in the manner required by sections 15(a) and 15(c)
of the Act and rule 18f-2 under the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Applicants are not requesting relief for any series other
than those advised by the Advisor. Applicants request relief with
respect to any existing and any future series of the Trust or any
other registered open-end management company that: (a) Is advised by
the Advisor or a person controlling, controlled by, or under common
control with the Advisor or its successor (each, also an
``Advisor''); (b) uses the manager of managers structure described
in the application; and (c) complies with the terms and conditions
of the requested order (any such series, a ``Fund'' and
collectively, the ``Funds''). The only existing registered open-end
management investment company that currently intends to rely on the
requested order is named as an Applicant, and the only series that
currently intends to rely on the requested order as a Fund is the
Collins Alternative Solutions Fund. For purposes of the requested
order, ``successor'' is limited to an entity that results from a
reorganization into another jurisdiction or a change in the type of
business organization. If the name of any Fund contains the name of
a Subadvisor (as defined below), that name will be preceded by the
name of the Advisor.
    \2\ Each future investment advisory agreement between an Advisor
and a Fund is also included in the term ``Advisory Agreement''. The
Advisor currently serves as investment advisor only to the Collins
Alternative Solutions Fund, a series of the Trust, under the
Advisory Agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. Under the terms of each Advisory Agreement, the Advisor will
provide the Funds with overall management services and as it deems
appropriate, continuously review, supervise and administer each Fund's
investment program, subject to the supervision of, and policies
established by the Board. For the investment management services it
will provide to each Fund, the Advisor will receive the fee specified
in the Advisory Agreement from such Fund based on the average daily net
assets of the Fund. The Advisory Agreement permits the Advisor, subject
to the approval of the Board, to delegate certain responsibilities to
one or more subadvisors (``Subadvisors''). The Advisor has entered into
subadvisory agreements with various Subadvisors (``Subadvisory
Agreements'') to provide investment advisory services to the Funds.\3\
Each Subadvisor is, and any future Subadvisor will be, an investment
adviser as defined in section 2(a)(20) of the Act as well as registered
with the Commission as an ``investment adviser'' under the Advisers
Act. The Advisor evaluates, allocates assets to and oversees the
Subadvisors, and makes recommendations about their hiring, termination
and replacement to the Board, at all times subject to the authority of
the Board. The Advisor will compensate the Subadvisors out of the
advisory fee paid by a Fund to the Advisor under the Advisory
Agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ As of the date of the amended application, the Advisor had
entered into Subadvisory Agreements with Whitebox Advisors, LLC,
Stadion Money Management, LLC, Pinebank Asset Management, LP,
Battenkill Asset Management, Inc. and The Cambridge Strategy (Asset
Management) Limited. None of the existing Subadvisors is affiliated
with the Advisor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. Applicants request an order to permit the Advisor, subject to
Board approval, to select certain Subadvisors to manage all or a
portion of the assets of a Fund or Funds pursuant to a Subadvisory
Agreement and materially amend Subadvisory Agreements without obtaining
shareholder approval. The requested relief will not extend to any
Subadvisor that is an affiliated person, as defined in section 2(a)(3)
of the Act, of the Trust or of the Advisor, other than by reason of
serving as a subadvisor to one or more of the Funds (``Affiliated
Subadvisor'').
    4. Applicants also request an order exempting the Funds from
certain disclosure provisions described below that may require the
Applicants to disclose fees paid by the Advisor or a Fund to each
Subadvisor. Applicants seek an order to permit the Trust to disclose
for a Fund (as both a dollar amount and as a percentage of the Fund's
net assets): (a) The aggregate fees paid to the Advisor and any
Affiliated Subadvisor; and (b) the aggregate fees paid to Subadvisors
other than Affiliated Subadvisors (collectively, ``Aggregate Fee
Disclosure''). Any Fund that employs an Affiliated Subadvisor will
provide separate disclosure of any fees paid to the Affiliated
Subadvisor.
    Applicants' Legal Analysis:
    1. Section 15(a) of the Act provides, in relevant part, that is
unlawful for any person to act as an investment adviser to a registered
investment company except pursuant to a written contract that has been
approved by a vote of a majority of the company's outstanding voting
securities. Rule 18f-2 under the Act provides that each series or class
of stock in a series investment company affected by a matter must
approve that matter if the Act requires shareholder approval.
    2. Form N-1A is the registration statement used by open-end
investment companies. Item 19(a)(3) of Form N-1A requires disclosure of
the method and amount of the investment adviser's compensation.
    3. Rule 20a-1 under the Act requires proxies solicited with respect
to a registered investment company to comply with Schedule 14A under
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``1934 Act''). Items 22(c)(1)(ii),
22(c)(1)(iii), 22(c)(8) and 22(c)(9) of Schedule 14A, taken together,
require a proxy statement for a shareholder meeting at which the
advisory contract will be voted upon to include the ``rate of
compensation of the investment adviser,'' the ``aggregate amount of the
investment adviser's fees,'' a description of the ``terms of the
contract to be acted upon,'' and, if a change in the advisory

fee is proposed, the existing and proposed fees and the difference
between the two fees.
    4. Regulation S-X sets forth the requirements for financial
statements required to be included as part of a registered investment
company's registration statement and shareholder reports filed with the
Commission. Sections 6-07(2)(a), (b), and (c) of Regulation S-X require
a registered investment company to include in its financial statement
information about investment advisory fees.
    5. Section 6(c) of the Act provides that the Commission may exempt
any person, security, or transaction or any class or classes of
persons, securities, or transactions from any provisions of the Act, or
from any rule thereunder, if such exemption is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest and consistent with the protection of investors
and the purposes fairly intended by the policy and provisions of the
Act. Applicants state that the requested relief meets this standard for
the reasons discussed below.
    6. Applicants assert that the shareholders expect the Advisor
subject to the review and approval of the Board, to select the
Subadvisors who are best suited to achieve the Fund's investment
objectives. Applicants assert that, from the perspective of the
shareholder, the role of the Subadvisors is substantially equivalent to
that of the individual portfolio managers employed by traditional
investment company advisory firms. Applicants state that requiring
shareholder approval of each Subadvisory Agreement would impose
unnecessary delays and expenses on the Funds and may preclude the Funds
from acting promptly when the Advisor and Board consider it appropriate
to hire Subadvisors or amend Subadvisory Agreements. Applicants note
that the Advisory Agreements and any Subadvisory Agreements with
Affiliated Subadvisors will remain subject to the shareholder approval
requirements of section 15(a) of the Act and rule 18f-2 under the Act.
    7. If a new Subadvisor is retained in reliance on the requested
order, the Funds will inform shareholders of the hiring of a new
Subadvisor pursuant to the following procedures (``Modified Notice and
Access Procedures''): (a) Within 90 days after a new Subadvisor is
hired for any Fund, that Fund will send its shareholders either a
Multi-manager Notice or a Multi-manager Notice and Multi-manager
Information Statement; \4\ and (b) the Fund will make the Multi-manager
Information Statement available on the Web site identified in the
Multi-manager Notice no later than when the Multi-manager Notice (or
Multi-manager Notice and Multi-manager Information Statement) is first
sent to shareholders, and will maintain it on that Web site for at
least 90 days. Applicants assert that a proxy solicitation to approve
the appointment of new Subadvisors would provide no more meaningful
information to shareholders than the proposed Multi-manager Information
Statement. Moreover, as indicated above, the applicable Board would
comply with the requirements of sections 15(a) and 15(c) of the Act
before entering into or amending Subadvisory Agreements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ A ``Multi-manager Notice'' will be modeled on a Notice of
Internet Availability as defined in rule 14a-16 under the Exchange
Act, and specifically will, among other things: (a) Summarize the
relevant information regarding the new Subadvisor; (b) inform
shareholders that the Multi-manager Information Statement is
available on a Web site; (c) provide the Web site address; (d) state
the time period during which the Multi-manager Information Statement
will remain available on that Web site; (e) provide instructions for
accessing and printing the Multi-manager Information Statement; and
(f) instruct the shareholder that a paper or email copy of the
Multi-manager Information Statement may be obtained, without charge,
by contacting the Funds.
    A ``Multi-manager Information Statement'' will meet the
requirements of Regulation 14C, Schedule 14C and Item 22 of Schedule
14A under the Exchange Act for an information statement, except as
modified by the requested order to permit Aggregate Fee Disclosure.
Multi-manager Information Statements will be filed electronically
with the Commission via the EDGAR system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    8. Applicants assert that the requested disclosure relief will
benefit shareholders of the Funds because it will improve the Advisor's
ability to negotiate the fees paid to Subadvisors. Applicants state
that the Advisor may be able to negotiate rates that are below a
Subadvisor's ``posted'' amounts if the Advisor is not required to
disclose the Subadvisors' fees to the public.
    Applicants' Conditions:
    Applicants agree that any order granting the requested relief will
be subject to the following conditions:
    1. Before a Fund may rely on the order requested in the
application, the operation of the Fund in the manner described in the
application will be approved by a majority of the Fund's outstanding
voting securities, as defined in the Act, or, in the case of a Fund
whose public shareholders purchase shares on the basis of a prospectus
containing the disclosure contemplated by condition 2 below, by the
sole initial shareholder before offering the Fund's shares to the
public.
    2. The prospectus for each Fund will disclose the existence,
substance, and effect of any order granted pursuant to the application.
Each Fund will hold itself out to the public as employing the manager
of managers structure described in the application. The prospectus will
prominently disclose that the Advisor has ultimate responsibility
(subject to oversight by the Board) to oversee the Subadvisors and
recommend their hiring, termination, and replacement.
    3. Funds will inform shareholders of the hiring of a new Subadvisor
within 90 days after the hiring of the new Subadvisor pursuant to the
Modified Notice and Access Procedures.
    4. The Advisor will not enter into a Subadvisory Agreement with any
Affiliated Subadvisor without that agreement, including the
compensation to be paid thereunder, being approved by the shareholders
of the applicable Fund.
    5. At all times, at least a majority of the Board will be
Independent Trustees, and the nomination and selection of new or
additional Independent Trustees will be placed within the discretion of
the then-existing Independent Trustees.
    6. When a Subadvisor change is proposed for a Fund with an
Affiliated Subadvisor, the Board, including a majority of the
Independent Trustees, will make a separate finding, reflected in the
applicable Board minutes, that such change is in the best interests of
the Fund and its shareholders and does not involve a conflict of
interest from which the Advisor or the Affiliated Subadvisor derives an
inappropriate advantage.
    7. Independent legal counsel, as defined in rule 0-1(a)(6) under
the Act, will be engaged to represent the Independent Trustees. The
selection of such counsel will be within the discretion of the then
existing Independent Trustees.
    8. Each Advisor will provide the Board, no less frequently than
quarterly, with information about the profitability of the Advisor on a
per-Fund basis. The information will reflect the impact on
profitability of the hiring or termination of any Subadvisor during the
applicable quarter.
    9. Whenever a Subadvisor is hired or terminated, the Advisor will
provide the Board with information showing the expected impact on the
profitability of the Advisor.
    10. The Advisor will provide general management services to each
Fund, including overall supervisory responsibility for the general
management and investment of the Fund's assets and, subject to review
and approval of the Board, will (i) set each Fund's overall investment
strategies; (ii) evaluate, select and recommend Subadvisors to manage
all or part of a Fund's assets; (iii) when appropriate,

allocate and reallocate a Fund's assets among multiple Subadvisors;
(iv) monitor and evaluate the performance of Subadvisors; and (v)
implement procedures reasonably designed to ensure that the Subadvisors
comply with each Fund's investment objective, policies and
restrictions.
    11. No trustee or officer of the Trust, or of a Fund, or director
or officer of the Advisor, will own directly or indirectly (other than
through a pooled investment vehicle that is not controlled by such
person) any interest in a Subadvisor, except for (a) ownership of
interests in the Advisor or any entity that controls, is controlled by,
or is under common control with the Advisor; or (b) ownership of less
than 1% of the outstanding securities of any class of equity or debt of
a publicly traded company that is either a Subadvisor or an entity that
controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with a
Subadvisor.
    12. Each Fund will disclose in its registration statement the
Aggregate Fee Disclosure.
    13. In the event the Commission adopts a rule under the Act
providing substantially similar relief to that in the order requested
in the application, the requested order will expire on the effective
date of that rule.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
under delegated authority.
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-26163 Filed 10-23-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 91 (Monday, May 11, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27735-27736]
[FR Doc No: 2020-10001]

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

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: EC20-54-000.
    Applicants: Mankato Energy Center, LLC, Mankato Energy Center II,
LLC, SWG Minnesota Holdings, LLC.
    Description: Supplement to April 21, 2020 Application for
Authorization Under Section 203 of the Federal Power Act, et al. of
Mankato Energy Center, LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 5/4/20.
    Accession Number: 20200504-5211.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/21/20.

    Docket Numbers: EC20-60-000.
    Applicants: NextEra Energy, Inc., Florida Power & Light Company,
Gulf Power Company.
    Description: Application for Approval of Internal Corporate
Reorganization under Section 203 of the Federal Power Act of NextEra
Energy, Inc., et al.
    Filed Date: 5/1/20.
    Accession Number: 20200501-5492.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/15/20.

    Docket Numbers: EC20-61-000.
    Applicants: Energy Harbor LLC, Energy Harbor Generation LLC, Energy
Harbor Nuclear Generation LLC, Pleasants Corp., Pleasants LLC, Avenue
Capital Management II, L.P., Nuveen Asset Management, LLC.
    Description: Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the
Federal Power Act, et al. of Energy Harbor LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 5/4/20.
    Accession Number: 20200504-5179.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/26/20.

    Docket Numbers: EC20-62-000.
    Applicants: DTE Electric Company, Isabella Wind, LLC.
    Description: Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the
Federal Power Act, et al. of DTE Electric Company, et al.
    Filed Date: 5/5/20.
    Accession Number: 20200505-5160.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/26/20.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:
    Docket Numbers: EG20-146-000.
    Applicants: Harmony Florida Solar, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of Harmony Florida Solar, LLC.
    Filed Date: 5/4/20.
    Accession Number: 20200504-5153.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/26/20.

    Docket Numbers: EG20-147-000.
    Applicants: Taylor Creek Solar, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of Taylor Creek Solar, LLC.
    Filed Date: 5/4/20.
    Accession Number: 20200504-5154.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/26/20.

    Docket Numbers: EG20-148-000.
    Applicants: Chicot Solar, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of Chicot Solar, LLC.

    Filed Date: 5/5/20.
    Accession Number: 20200505-5158.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/26/20.

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

    Docket Numbers: ER20-432-000.
    Applicants: The Empire District Electric Company.
    Description: Second Supplement and Amendment to November 30, 2019
Application for Waiver of Affiliate Rules, et al. of The Empire
District Electric Company.
    Filed Date: 5/1/20.
    Accession Number: 20200501-5368.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/11/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-703-001.
    Applicants: 41MB 8me, LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: 41MB 8me, LLC--Market-Based Rate
Tariff Update to be effective 5/5/2020.
    Filed Date: 5/4/20.
    Accession Number: 20200504-5137.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/26/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-703-002
    Applicants: 41MB 8me, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of 41MB 8me,
LLC.
    Filed Date: 5/4/20.
    Accession Number: 20200504-5197.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/26/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1237-000.
    Applicants: Ameren Illinois Company.
    Description: Motion to Intervene, Formal Challenge, et al. of
Southwestern Electric Cooperative, Inc. to March 10, 2020 Annual
Informational Filing by Ameren Illinois Company.
    Filed Date: 4/15/20.
    Accession Number: 20200415-5215.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/26/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1604-001.
    Applicants: EF Oxnard LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Amendment to Market-Based Rates
Application to be effective 6/14/2020.
    Filed Date: 5/5/20.
    Accession Number: 20200505-5101.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/26/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1760-001.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Errata: Amendment to ISA & ICSA, SA
Nos. 4501 & 4502; Queue No. AA2-061 to be effective 6/30/2016.
    Filed Date: 5/5/20.
    Accession Number: 20200505-5154.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/26/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1765-000.
    Applicants: Portland General Electric Company.
    Description: Report on Interconnection Study Metrics of Portland
General Electric Company.
    Filed Date: 5/1/20.
    Accession Number: 20200501-5535.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/22/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1766-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2041R9 Kansas City Board of
Public Utilities PTP Service Agreement Cancellation to be effective 1/
1/2020.
    Filed Date: 5/5/20.
    Accession Number: 20200505-5053.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/26/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1767-000.
    Applicants: New York Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Request for Waiver, et al. of New York Independent
System Operator, Inc.
    Filed Date: 5/4/20.
    Accession Number: 20200504-5223.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/11/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1768-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Notice of Cancellation of Firm Point-To-Point
Transmission Service Agreement of Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Filed Date: 5/5/20.
    Accession Number: 20200505-5145.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/26/20.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following public
utility holding company filings:
    Docket Numbers: PH20-11-000.
    Applicants: American States Water Company.
    Description: American States Water Company submits FERC 65-B Waiver
Notification.
    Filed Date: 5/4/20.
    Accession Number: 20200504-5170.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/26/20.

    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: May 5, 2020.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-10001 Filed 5-8-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 199 (Monday, October 17, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 62729-62731]
[FR Doc No: 2022-22634]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2022-0761]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Missouri River Mile Markers 139.5-139.2, Jefferson
City, MO

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for
all navigable waters in the Missouri River at Mile Markers (MM) 139.5-
139.2. The safety zone is needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the
marine environment from all potential hazards associated with
electrical line work. Entry of vessels or persons into this zone is
prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port
Sector Upper Mississippi River (COTP) or a designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from October 15, 2022 until October 31,
2022.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2022-0761 in the search box and click ``Search.'' Next, in the Document
Type column, select ``Supporting & Related Material.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Lieutenant Commander Richard

Cherkauer, Sector Upper Mississippi River Waterways Management
Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of The Port Sector Upper Mississippi River
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
MM Mile marker
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice
and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because it is impracticable. The NPRM process
would delay the establishment of the safety zone until after the
construction work is completed and compromise public safety. We must
establish this temporary safety zone immediately and lack sufficient
time to provide a reasonable comment period and then consider those
comments before issuing the rule.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Delaying this rule would be
contrary to public safety due to ongoing electrical line work work.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C.
70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231). The Captain of the Port Sector Upper
Mississippi River (COTP) has determined that potential hazards
associated with electrical line work will be a safety concern for
anyone operating or transiting within the Missouri River from MM 139.5-
139.2. This rule is needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the
marine environment in the navigable waters within the safety zone while
electrical line work is being conducted.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    Electrical line work will be occurring near MM 139.5-139.2
beginning October 15, 2022. The safety zone is designed to protect
waterway users until work is complete.
    No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the safety zone
without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated
representative. A designated representative is a commissioned, warrant,
or petty officer of the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) assigned to units under
the operational control of USCG Sector Upper Mississippi River. To seek
permission to enter, contact the COTP or a designated representative
via VHF-FM channel 16, or through USCG Sector Upper Mississippi River
at<PHONE_NUMBER>. Persons and vessels permitted to enter the safety zone
must comply with all lawful orders or directions issued by the COTP or
designated representative. The COTP or a designated representative will
inform the public of the effective period for the safety zone as well
as any changes in the dates and times of enforcement, as well as
reductions in the size of the safety zone as conditions improve,
through Local Notice to Mariners (LNMs), Broadcast Notices to Mariners
(BNMs), and/or Safety Marine Information Broadcast (SMIB), as
appropriate.

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. This rule has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, this
rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB).
    This regulatory action determination is based on a safety zone
located on the Missouri River at MM 139.5-139.2, near Jefferson City,
MO. The Safety Zone is expected to be active only during the hours of 9
a.m. through 4 p.m., or only when work is being conducted, every day
until October 31, 2022.

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 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 the
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any
vessel owner or operator because the zone will be enforced only when
work is being conducted.
    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
call or email 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 a 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 does 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.

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 will 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
Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and
Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast
Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(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 a
safety zone encompassing the width of the Upper Mississippi River at MM
139.5-139.2. It is categorically excluded from further review under
paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-
01-001-01, Rev. 1. A Record of Environmental Consideration supporting
this determination is available in the docket. For instructions on
locating the docket, see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to call or email 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 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-
6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1,
Revision No. 01.2.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T08-0761 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T08-0761   Safety Zone; Missouri River, Mile Markers 139.5-
139.2, Jefferson City, MO.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: all navigable
waters within Missouri Mile Markers (MM) 139.5-139.2.
    (b) Enforcement period. This section will be subject to enforcement
from October 15, 2022 through October 31, 2022.
    (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general safety zone
regulations in Sec.  165.23, entry of persons or vessels into this
safety zone described in paragraph (a) of this section is prohibited
unless authorized by the COTP or a designated representative. A
designated representative is a commissioned, warrant, or petty officer
of the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) assigned to units under the operational
control of USCG Sector Upper Mississippi River.
    (2) To seek permission to enter, contact the COTP or a designated
representative via VHF-FM channel 16, or through USCG Sector Upper
Mississippi River at<PHONE_NUMBER>. Persons and vessels permitted to
enter the safety zone must comply with all lawful orders or directions
issued by the COTP or designated representative
    (d) Informational broadcasts. The COTP or a designated
representative will inform the public of the effective period for the
safety zone as well as any changes in the dates and times of
enforcement, as well as reductions in size or scope of the safety zone
as ice or flood conditions improve, through Local Notice to Mariners
(LNMs), Broadcast Notices to Mariners (BNMs), and/or Safety Marine
Information Broadcast (SMIB) as appropriate.

    Dated: October 12, 2022.
A.R. Bender,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Sector Upper Mississippi
River.
[FR Doc. 2022-22634 Filed 10-13-22; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: September 10, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 174)]
[Notices]
[Page 46637]
[DOCID:fr10se09-104]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

Notice of Applications for Certificates of Public Convenience and
Necessity and Foreign Air Carrier Permits Filed Under Subpart B
(Formerly Subpart Q) During the Week Ending August 29, 2009

    The following Applications for Certificates of Public Convenience
and Necessity and Foreign Air Carrier Permits were filed under Subpart
B (formerly Subpart Q) of the Department of Transportation's Procedural
Regulations (See 14 CFR 301.201 et seq.). The due date for Answers,
Conforming Applications, or Motions to Modify Scope are set forth below
for each application. Following the Answer period DOT may process the
application by expedited procedures. Such procedures may consist of the
adoption of a show-cause order, a tentative order, or in appropriate
cases a final order without further proceedings.
    Docket Number: DOT-OST-2003-16690.
    Date Filed: August 28, 2009.
    Due Date for Answers, Conforming Applications, or Motion to Modify
Scope: September 18, 2009.
    Description: Application of Arrow Air, Inc. requesting renewal of
its certificate of public convenience and necessity for scheduled all-
cargo foreign air transportation of property and mail between the
terminal point Miami, Florida on the one hand and the co-terminal
points Manaus, Rio de Janeiro and Sao Paulo, Brazil on the other hand.
Arrow also requests renewal of its designation and allocation of five
(5) weekly frequencies.

    Docket Number: DOT-OST-2009-0205.
    Date Filed: August 28, 2009.
    Due Date for Answers, Conforming Applications, or Motion to Modify
Scope: September 18, 2009.
    Description: Joint Application of Republic Airways Holdings, Inc.
(``RJET'') and Frontier Airlines, Inc. (``Frontier'') requesting
disclaimer of jurisdiction or, in the alternative, approval of the de
facto transfer of international route authorities held by Frontier that
will result from RJET's acquisition of Frontier's corporate parent,
Frontier Airlines Holdings, Inc.

    Docket Number: DOT-OST-2009-0208.
    Date Filed: August 28, 2009.
    Due Date for Answers, Conforming Applications, or Motion to Modify
Scope: September 18, 2009.
    Description: Application of KaiserAir, Inc. requesting a
certificate of public convenience and necessity authorizing it to
conduct interstate charter air transportation of persons, property and
mail with large aircraft.

Renee V. Wright,
Program Manager, Docket Operations, Federal Register Liaison.
[FR Doc. E9-21803 Filed 9-9-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P