                 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                            WASHINGTON, D.C.  20460
                                                                      OFFICE OF
                                                            CHEMICAL SAFETY AND
\* MERGEFORMAT
                                                           POLLUTION PREVENTION

MEMORANDUM

Date:  DRAFT

SUBJECT:  Mandipropamid:  Amendment to Revised Human Health Risk Assessment For New Uses On Basil, Ginseng and Snap Beans, as Well as Crop Group Expansions for Fruiting Vegetable; Small Fruit, Vine Climbing, Except Fuzzy Kiwifruit; and Bulb Onion and Green Onion Subgroups.

PC Code:  036602
DP Number:  Dxxxxxx
Decision No.:  xxxxxx
Registration No.:   100-1254
Petition No.:  2E8126
Regulatory Action:  Section 3
Risk Assessment Type:  Single Chemical Aggregate
Case No.:   7058
TXR No.:  NA
CAS No.:  374726-62-2
MRID No.:   None
40 CFR:  §180.637

FROM:	Dennis McNeilly, Chemist and Risk Assessor
	William T. Drew, Chemist
	Risk Assessment Branch II
		Health Effects Division (7509P)

THROUGH:  Michael A. Doherty, Ph.D., Chemist
      Christina Swartz, Chief
		Risk Assessment Branch II
		Health Effects Division (7509P)

TO:	Laura Nollen/Barbara Madden, RM 05
      Risk Integration, Minor Use, Emergency Response Branch
	Registration Division (7505P)

Syngenta has contacted the Registration Division concerning HED's Aug 27, 2013 risk assessment for mandipropamid.  That risk assessment involved, inter alia, a request by IR-4 to expand the three crop subgroups, i.e., for small fruit, vine climbing, except fuzzy kiwifruit; and bulb onion and green onion subgroups.  Syngenta requests that the US tolerance for grapes (subgroup 13-07F) and onions (both bulb (subgroup 3-07A) and green onions (subgroup 3-07B)) remain at the current levels to maintain the existing harmonization with Canada.  Syngenta has submitted export information from the USDA with this request for grapes and onions and these data demonstrate that the major export market for US growers of these commodities is Canada.  Syngenta also states that maintaining this harmonization with Canada is critical to allowing US growers to continue to export to other key markets, such as the EU.

IR-4 had requested several crop group conversions that HED had recommended harmonizing with Codex, but that will result in disharmony with Canadian tolerances, as follows:

a)  The U.S. subgroup 13-07F, represented by grape, is being recommended at 2.0 ppm in order to harmonize with Codex. This will supersede the current U.S. grape tolerance at 1.4 ppm, which will no longer be harmonized with the Canadian tolerance grape MRL at 1.4 mg/kg.

b)  The U.S. subgroup 3-07A tolerance (translated from bulb onion) will be harmonized with Codex at 0.1 ppm; however, this tolerance will supersede the current bulb onion U.S. tolerance at 0.05 ppm, which was harmonized with Canada. The U.S. 3-07A tolerance will no longer be harmonized with Canada.

c)  Finally, the U.S. subgroup 3-07B tolerance (translated from green onion) will be harmonized with Codex at 7.0 ppm; however, this tolerance will supersede the current green onion U.S. tolerance at 4.0 ppm, which was harmonized with Canada. The U.S. 3-07B tolerance will no longer be harmonized with Canada.

HED had recommended for harmonization with CODEX in the Aug 27, 2013 risk assessment, rather than harmonization with the existing Canadian MRLs, due to the FQPA directive to harmonize with CODEX.  However, in this case it appears that the greatest trade irritant would be created by not harmonizing the US tolerances with the Canadian MRLs.  Therefore HED is revising the tolerance recommendations for these three crop subgroups to harmonize with PMRA as follows (the other tolerance recommendations remain the same):

Tolerance Revision Summary for Mandipropamid.

                      Commodity as Proposed by Registrant
                           Proposed Tolerance (ppm)
                      Revised Recommended Tolerance (ppm)
                    Comments; Correct Commodity Definition
Fruit, small, vine climbing, subgroup 13-07F, except fuzzy kiwifruit
                                      2.0
                                      1.4
Fruit, small, vine climbing, except fuzzy kiwifruit, subgroup 13-07F. See footnote a below.
Onion, bulb, subgroup 3-07A
                                      0.1
                                     0.05
See footnote b below.
Onion, green, subgroup 3-07B
                                      7.0
                                      4.0
See footnote c below.
* Notes:  a)  When the crop subgroup 13-07F tolerance is established, then the grape tolerance should be deleted.  b)  When the crop subgroup 3-07A tolerance is established, then the tolerance for onion, dry bulb should be deleted.  c)  When the crop subgroup 3-07B tolerance is established, then the tolerance for Onion, green should be deleted.

Since the previous dietary assessment was conducted using the higher tolerance/exposure level recommended in the original risk assessment (i.e., subgroups 13-07F, 3-07A, and 3-07B), and there were no risks of concern, a new dietary assessment is not necessary.

HED Recommendations

HED recommends in favor of establishing tolerances for residues of mandipropamid as specified in Section 2.2.2.

Data Deficiencies

No additional data are required to support HED's currently recommended tolerances; however, additional data would be needed to support all of the proposed tolerances associated with the petition.  The submitted snap bean data do not support the proposed tolerances in succulent beans and cowpea forage (ChemSAC meeting; 17 July 2013).  Additional field trial data on a succulent shelled bean cultivar (such as lima beans) would be necessary in order to establish a tolerance in succulent beans.  Because of the possibility of detectable residues occurring in dairy cattle commodities (fat, milk and liver) arising from the feeding of treated cowpea forage, the concurrent establishment of mandipropamid tolerances at the limit of quantitation (LOQ) in those commodities would be necessary.  However, with no validated analytical method for enforcing tolerances in livestock commodities, it is not possible to establish such tolerances.  Therefore, the proposed tolerance in cowpea forage cannot be established until a validated method for determining mandipropamid residues in livestock (cattle) commodities is available.  Any such method submitted would need an independent laboratory validation (ILV).  (If tolerances for additional livestock feed items other than cowpea forage are proposed, a livestock feeding study should be submitted.)

Since the last risk assessment, an immunotoxicity study was received which fulfills a previously identified data gap.  In this study, no evidence of immunotoxicity was observed up to the highest dose tested (649 mg/kg/day).  In addition, HED's Hazard and Science Policy Council (HASPOC) determined that a subchronic inhalation study in the rat is not required for mandipropamid (TXR #0056610, J. Alstine, 3/14/2013).

Tolerance Considerations

HED has examined the toxicology and residue chemistry database for mandipropamid.  There are no issues that would preclude establishing tolerances for mandipropamid for the commodities listed in Table 2.2.2.

Notes to RD:  a) When the crop subgroup 13-07F tolerance is established, then the grape tolerance should be deleted.  b) When the crop subgroup 3-07A tolerance is established, then the tolerance for onion, dry bulb, should be deleted.  c) When the crop subgroup 3-07B tolerance is established, then the tolerance for onion, green should be deleted.   d)  According to HED's Interim Guidance on Tolerance Expressions (S. Knizner; 27 May 2009), the tolerance expression for mandipropamid cited in 40CFR §180.637[a] should be revised to state:  Tolerances are established for residues of mandipropamid, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the commodities listed in the table below.  Compliance with the tolerance levels specified below is to be determined by measuring only mandipropamid (4-chloro-N-[2-[3-methoxy-4-(2-propynyloxy)phenyl]ethyl]-α-(2-propynyloxy)benzeneacetamide) in or on the commodity.

Recommended Tolerances

Pending submission of a revised Section F (to propose tolerance levels in accordance with those recommended by HED, and to correct some of the commodity definitions), there are no residue chemistry issues that would preclude establishing tolerances in the requested commodities, except for those in cowpea forage and succulent beans.  The recommended tolerances are listed in Table 2.2.2.

Table 2.2.2.  Tolerance Summary for Mandipropamid.

                      Commodity as Proposed by Registrant
                           Proposed Tolerance (ppm)
                          Recommended Tolerance (ppm)
                    Comments; Correct Commodity Definition
Basil, fresh
                                      30
                                      30
Basil, fresh leaves
Basil, dried
                                      200
                                      200
Basil, dried leaves
Bean, succulent
                                     0.90
                                     None
Field trial data on a succulent shelled bean cultivar is needed.
Bean, snap
                                     None
                                     0.90
The snap bean field trials support the establishment of this tolerance.
Ginseng
                                      0.3
                                     0.30

Cowpea, forage
                                      15
                                     None
A validated method (i.e. with an ILV) for residues in cattle commodities is needed.
Vegetable, fruiting, group 8-10
                                      1.0
                                      1.0

Fruit, small, vine climbing, subgroup 13-07F, except fuzzy kiwifruit
                                      2.0
                                      1.4
Fruit, small, vine climbing, except fuzzy kiwifruit, subgroup 13-07F. See footnote a below.
Onion, bulb, subgroup 3-07A
                                      0.1
                                     0.05
See footnote b below.
Onion, green, subgroup 3-07B
                                      7.0
                                      4.0
See footnote c below.
* Notes:  a)  When the crop subgroup 13-07F tolerance is established, then the grape tolerance should be deleted.  b)  When the crop subgroup 3-07A tolerance is established, then the tolerance for onion, dry bulb should be deleted.  c)  When the crop subgroup 3-07B tolerance is established, then the tolerance for Onion, green should be deleted.

Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances

Instead of the proposed tolerance in ginseng (0.3 ppm), HED recommends establishing the tolerance at 0.30 ppm, in order to avoid the situation where a field sample containing residues significantly above the tolerance (0.34 ppm, for example) would be considered non-violative.  For the same reason, HED recommends that the proposed tolerance of 0.1 ppm in bulb onions (subgroup 3-07A) be revised to 0.10 ppm.

The submitted snap bean data do not support the proposed tolerance in succulent beans.  A cowpea forage tolerance cannot be established due to the lack of a livestock analytical enforcement method, and a supporting livestock analytical method ILV (See Section 2.1).  Therefore, HED is not recommending in favor of the proposed tolerances in succulent beans and cowpea forage.

HED had originally recommended (Aug 27, 2013) tolerances for:  Fruit, small, vine climbing, subgroup 13-07F, except fuzzy kiwifruit; Onion, bulb, subgroup 3-07A; and Onion, green, subgroup 3-07B that were harmonized with CODEX, rather than harmonization with the existing Canadian MRLs, due to the FQPA directive to harmonize with CODEX.  However, in this case it appears that the greatest trade irritant would be created by not harmonizing the US tolerances with the Canadian MRLs.  Therefore HED is revising the tolerance recommendations for these three crop subgroups to recommend harmonize with PMRA as described in Table 2.2.2.

International Harmonization

Neither Codex nor PMRA have established MRLs for mandipropamid in any of the commodities associated with the proposed new uses.  As such, there is no harmonization issue associated with Codex for the proposed new uses in the current action.  PMRA and EPA are jointly reviewing the basil, ginseng and snap bean data in the current action, and EPA and PMRA are harmonized for fresh basil, dried basil, and ginseng.  PMRA is establishing an MRL in edible-podded beans at 0.9 ppm, while HED is recommending for a tolerance in snap beans at 0.90 ppm.  Although the tolerance/MRL level is harmonized, HED cannot harmonize with PMRA on the commodity definition, as the submitted snap bean data do not support use on all succulent beans.

Both the current tolerance in crop group 8 (1.0 ppm) and the proposed tolerance in crop group 8-10 (1.0 ppm) are harmonized with the Codex (bell and non-bell peppers) and PMRA's (tomatoes, okras and peppers) MRLs.  For the other crop group expansions, EPA is harmonizing with Canadian MRLs, even though this will result in discrepancies between US tolerances and CODEX MRLs.  The HED-recommended tolerance of 1.4 ppm in subgroup 13-07F, translated from grape data, will be harmonized with the Canadian MRL in grapes, but will not be harmonized with the CODEX MRL of 2.0 mg/kg in grapes.  The HED-recommended tolerance of 0.05 ppm in subgroup 3-07A, translated from dry bulb onion data, will be harmonized with PMRA's MRL of 0.05 ppm in various bulb onions, but will not be harmonized with the Codex MRL 0f 0.1 ppm in bulb onions.  The HED-recommended tolerance of 4.0 ppm in subgroup 3-07B, translated from green onion data, will be harmonized with PMRA's MRL  in various green onions, but will not be harmonized with the CODEX MRL of 7.0 ppm in spring onions.

Label Recommendations

None

Pesticide Use Pattern
IR-4 HAS REQUESTED THAT NEW SECTION 3 USES OF THE fungicide mandipropamid be added to the label for Revus 2.08SC (EPA Reg. No. 100-1254).  The proposed new uses would be on basil, cowpea forage, ginseng, succulent beans, and greenhouse tomatoes.  The proposed use directions are summarized in Table 3.2.

Table 3.2.  Summary of Proposed Directions for Use of Mandipropamid.
                        Application Type; Equipment[1]
                                   Use Rate
                                   (lb ai/A)
                             Max. Uses Per Season
                            Max. Seasonal Use Rate
                                   (lb ai/A)
                                 PHI[2] (Days)
            Use Directions, Application Timing, and Limitations[3]
                                     Basil
                    Foliar; any ground or aerial equipment.
                                  0.09 - 0.13
                                       4
                                     0.52
                                       1
RTI[4] of 7-10 days.

                                    Ginseng
                    Foliar; any ground or aerial equipment.
                                  0.09 - 0.13
                                       4
                                     0.52
                                       2
RTI of 7-10 days.

                        Succulent Beans (Cowpea Forage)
                    Foliar; any ground or aerial equipment.
                                  0.09 - 0.13
                                       4
                                     0.52
                                       1
RTI of 7-10 days.

                              Greenhouse Tomatoes
                    Foliar; any ground or aerial equipment.
                                  0.09 - 0.13
                                       4
                                     0.52
                                       1
RTI of 7-10 days.  May be applied via chemigation.
1. For ground application, apply in a minimum of 10 gallons of water per acre (GPA), unless specified otherwise on the label.  Do not apply through any ultra-low volume (ULV) spray system.  For aerial application, use only on crops where aerial applications are indicated.  Apply in a minimum of 5 GPA, unless specified otherwise on this label.  Do not apply through any ULV spray system.  For chemigation, use only on crops where chemigation is specified on the label.  Apply no more than 2 sequential applications unless otherwise stated in the crop-specific section. Do not use in transplant production.
2. PHI = Pre-Harvest Interval.
3. Begin applications prior to disease development.  Use the shorter interval and/or higher rates under high pressure, or when conditions are conducive to disease.  The addition of a spreading/penetrating type adjuvant such as a non-ionic based surfactant (NIS) or crop oil concentrate (COC) or blend is recommended.
4. RTI = Re-Treatment Interval.

The Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) statement on the proposed label requires applicators, flaggers and other handlers to wear: long-sleeved shirt and long pants, shoes plus socks. PPE recommended on the proposed label for early entry to treated areas include: coveralls, chemical-resistant gloves made of any waterproof material, shoes plus socks.

Conclusions:   The use directions are adequate to allow for evaluation of the residue data.  However, as the submitted snap bean data do not support the proposed use on succulent beans, the label section containing directions for use on succulent beans ("Bean, succulent") should instead refer to snap beans ("Bean, snap"), and the listing of all other succulent bean commodities should be deleted.  A cowpea forage tolerance cannot be established due to the lack of a livestock analytical enforcement method, and supporting livestock analytical method ILV.

No other revisions are made to HED's Aug 27, 2013 risk assessment for mandipropamid.


	           UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

      DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

             OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

                  WASHINGTON, D.C.

								SERVED:  June 21, 2004

New Route Opportunities (U.S.-China)

2004 Cargo Designation and 2004/2005 All-Cargo Frequencies

Docket OST-2004-18468

2004 Combination Frequencies, Docket OST-2004-18469

NOTICE

The United States and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) initialed,
on June 18, 2004, a protocol amending the U.S.-PRC aviation agreement.
The amended agreement will greatly expand the opportunities for the air
carriers of both countries.  These opportunities are increased
progressively through 2010.  Some of the new U.S. carrier rights can be
implemented as early as August 1, 2004.  To permit us to begin
processing requests to take advantage of these new opportunities as soon
as possible, we are by this Notice calling for applications for certain
of the newly available rights, as set forth below.  We intend to address
other rights available under the new agreement by subsequent separate
action.

All-Cargo Opportunities

Under the new agreement, the United States may, for services that may
begin as of August 1, 2004, designate one additional carrier for
all-cargo services between the United States and China.  Also, prior to
the date on which services could begin under the next possible U.S.
all-cargo designation, i.e., March 25, 2006, U.S. carrier all-cargo
services may increase by 39 frequencies, with 21 additional all-cargo
frequencies available August 1, 2004, and 18 additional all-cargo
frequencies available March 25, 2005.

Against this background, by this Notice, we invite U.S. carriers
interested in the available August 1, 2004 U.S.-PRC all-cargo
designation to file certificate applications in the above-referenced
cargo-services docket.  The applicants should indicate an approximate
date for beginning service, a proposed routing, equipment type, and
number of frequencies requested for the proposed services.

2

We also invite carriers currently holding authority to perform scheduled
all-cargo service to the PRC to file applications for the newly
available 2004 and 2005 all-cargo frequencies, indicating the markets to
be served, the number of frequencies sought and the time at which the
carrier proposes to begin using them (either now or beginning March 25,
2005), and the aircraft that may be used.  Such applications should be
filed in the above-referenced cargo-services docket.  We remind carriers
that only 21 frequencies are immediately available, with an additional
18 frequencies available in Spring 2005.    Applicants for the newly
available all-cargo designation need not file a separate application for
these frequencies.  They should, however, clearly specify in their
certificate applications the number of frequencies proposed for startup
and the number requested, if any, out of the 2005 allotment.  In
allocating the 39 frequencies, we will weigh the public interest
considerations in regards to both the newly designated carrier and the
incumbent carriers.

Combination Carrier Opportunities

The new agreement provides for 14 additional frequencies for combination
services effective August 1, 2004.  Since the agreement does not provide
for a new U.S. carrier designation for combination services until March
25, 2005, the only U.S. carriers eligible to use these frequencies at
this time are the U.S. carriers currently designated to operate
combination services to China, namely—Northwest and United.  By this
Notice, we invite Northwest and United to file applications for the
available frequencies in the above-referenced combination frequencies
docket.  The carriers should indicate the number of frequencies
requested and the markets proposed for the services with the
frequencies.

Procedures

All applications should be filed in the new dockets we are establishing
here (cargo designation/frequency applicants should file in the cargo
docket; carriers seeking combination frequencies should file in the
combination docket) and should be filed with the Department of
Transportation, Dockets Operations, Room PL-401, 400 Seventh Street, SW,
Washington DC 20590.  Applications should be filed no later than 7 days
from the service date of this notice; answers thereto should be filed no
later than 5 calendar days thereafter; and any replies 2 calendar days
after answers.  In consideration of the accelerated procedural dates for
filing of applications and responsive pleadings, we authorize service of
documents by facsimile and by electronic mail.  Carriers that are
interested in such service, however, should state if they want service
by email and should provide interested parties with their FAX numbers
and/or email address.

3

Further procedures for acting on the applications, if necessary, will be
established in the future by Department notice or order.

We will serve this notice on all U.S. certificated air carriers with
large aircraft, the Air Transport Association, and the National Air
Carrier Association.

By:

							PAUL L. GRETCH

         Director

    Office of International Aviation

(SEAL)

Dated:  June 21, 2004

An electronic version of this notice is available on the World Wide Web
at

  HYPERLINK "http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp"
http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp

SERVICE LIST

Marshall S Sinick		Joanne Young/David Kirstein		Carl Nelson Jr

Alaska Airlines			North American, World Airways,	American Airlines &

Aloha Airlines			   & America West			TWA LLC

Florida West			Baker & Hostetler, Suite 1100		Suite #600

Suite 500			1050 Connecticut Ave NW		1101 17th Street NW

1201 Pennsylvania Ave NW	Washington DC 20036			Washington DC 20036

Washington DC 20004

Charles Donley II		Aaron Goerlich				Robert E. Cohn

American Trans Air		Sunworld International			Delta Air Lines

Squire Sanders & Dempsey	Garafalo, Goerlich, Hainbach		Midway Air Lines

P O Box 407			1200 New Hampshire Ave NW		Shaw Pittman

Washington DC 20044-0407	Washington DC 20036			2300 N Street NW

									Washington DC 20037

Michelle Faust			R Bruce Keiner Jr			Lorraine Halloway

MN Airlines			Continental Airlines			Continental Micronesia/

Ungaretti & Harris		Crowell & Moring			Air Micronesia

1500 K Street NW #250		1001 Pennsylvania Ave NW		1001 Pennsylvania NW

Washington DC 20005		Washington DC 20004			Washington DC 20004

Jonathan B Hill			Jeffrey Manley				Howard Kass

Hawaiian Airlines		United Air Lines 			US Airways

Dow Lohnes & Albertson	Wilmer Cutler & Pickering		2345 Crystal Drive

Suite 800			2445 M Street NW			Arlington, VA 22227

1200 New Hampshire NW	Washington DC 20037-1420

Washington DC 20036

Nathaniel Breed		Megan Rosia 				Robert P Silverberg

Pan American Airways		Northwest Airlines Inc.			ABX Air, Kitty Hawk

Zuckert Scoutt & Rasenberger	901 15th Street NW #310		  & Midwest
Airlines

888 Seventeenth Street NW	Washington DC 20005			Silverberg Goldman

Washington DC 20006-3309						  & Bikoff

							1101 30th Street NW

							Washington DC  20007

Gary Garafalo			David E Vaughan			Kevin Montgomery

Air Transport Intl		United Parcel Service			Polar Air Cargo, Inc.

1200 New Hampshire Ave NW	Kelley Drye & Warren			1747 Pennsylvania Ave
NW

Washington DC 20036		1200 19th St NW #500			Suite 875

		Washington DC 20036			Washington DC 20006

Steve Lachter			John L Richardson			Russ Pommer

ASTAR Air Cargo		Amerijet International			Atlas Air

1150 Connecticut Av NW	John L Richardson PLLC		1747 Pennsylvania Ave NW

Washington DC 20036		1156 15TH St NW #1105		Suite 875

				Washington DC 20005			Washington DC 20006

									Service page 2

Tom Lydon	 		Moffett Roller				Mark W Atwood       .

Evergreen International		Gemini Air Cargo			Custom Air Transport &

1401 New York Ave NW	Roller & Bauer				   Kalitta Air

Washington DC 20005-2147	1020 19th St NW #400			Sher & Blackwell

		Washington DC 20036			1850 M Street NW #900

							Washington DC  20036

Nancy Sparks			Stephen Alterman			Lawrence Wasko

Federal Express			Northern Air Cargo & Horizon		Arrow Air

1101 Pennsylvania Ave NW	Meyers & Alterman			1150 Connecticut Ave NW

Washington DC 20004		1220 19th Street NW			Washington DC  20036

				Washington DC 20036-2438

Pierre Murphy			Air Transport Association		National Air Carrier Assn.

Brendan Airways		International Department		1000 Wilson Blvd

d/b/a USA3000			Suite 1100				Suite 1700

1200 New Hampshire NW	1301 Pennsylvania Ave NW		Arlington, VA 22209

Washington DC 20036		Washington DC 20004-1707

 The designation is available for U.S. Route B under the U.S.-PRC
agreement, the U.S. all-cargo route.  Federal Express Corporation and
United Parcel Service Co. are the two U.S. carriers currently designated
for Route B.

 The original submission is to be unbound and without tabs on 8½" x 11"
white paper, using dark ink (not green) to facilitate use of the
Department’s docket imaging system.  In the alternative, filers are
encouraged to use the electronic submission capability available through
the dockets/DMS Internet site (  HYPERLINK "http://dms.dot.gov"
http://dms.dot.gov ) by following the instructions at the web site.


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 58 (Monday, March 27, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18026-18028]
[FR Doc No: 2023-06102]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2022-1424; Airspace Docket No. 22-AEA-11]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of VOR Federal Airways V-268 and V-474, Revocation of
Jet Route J-518 and VOR Federal Airway V-119, and Establishment of Area
Navigation Route Q-178 in the Vicinity of Indian Head, PA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends Very High Frequency (VHF) Omnidirectional
Range (VOR) Federal airways V-268 and V-474, revokes Jet Route J-518
and VOR Federal airway V-119, and establishes Area Navigation (RNAV)
route Q-178. The FAA is taking this action due to the planned
decommissioning of the VOR portion of the Indian Head, PA, VOR/Tactical
Air Navigation (VORTAC) navigational aid (NAVAID). The Indian Head VOR
is being decommissioned in support of the FAA's VOR Minimum Operational
Network (MON) program.

DATES: Effective date 0901 UTC, June 15, 2023. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order JO 7400.11
and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: A copy of the NPRM, all comments received, this final rule,
and all background material may be viewed online at www.regulations.gov
using the FAA Docket number. Electronic retrieval help and guidelines
are available on the website. It is available 24 hours each day, 365
days each year.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11G, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points,
and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. You may also contact the Rules and
Regulations Group, Office of Policy, Federal Aviation Administration,
800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking for Docket No.
FAA-2022-1424 in the Federal Register (87 FR 72904; November 28, 2022),
amending VOR Federal airways V-268 and V-474, revoking Jet Route J-518
and VOR Federal airway V-119, and establishing Area Navigation (RNAV)
route Q-178 due to the planned decommissioning of the VOR portion of
the Indian Head, PA, VORTAC NAVAID. Interested parties were invited to
participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on
the proposal. No comments were received.

Differences From the NPRM

    In the NPRM, the FAA erroneously stated that, although the VOR
portion of the Indian Head VORTAC was planned for decommissioning, the
co-located Distance Measuring Equipment (DME) would be retained.
Instead, the co-located Tactical Air Navigation (TACAN) is being
retained to provide navigational service for military operations and
DME service in support of current and future Next Generation Air
Transportation System Performance Based Navigation procedures. This
does not affect the changes to the airways in this rule.

Incorporation by Reference

    Jet Routes are published in paragraph 2004, United States Area
Navigation Routes (Q-routes) are published in

paragraph 2006, and VOR Federal airways are published in paragraph
6010(a) of FAA Order JO 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 on an annual
basis. This document amends the current version of that order, FAA
Order JO 7400.11G, dated August 19, 2022, and effective September 15,
2022. FAA Order JO 7400.11G is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. These amendments will be published
in the next update to FAA Order JO 7400.11.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11G lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas,
air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

The Rule

    This action amends 14 CFR part 71 by amending VOR Federal airways
V-268 and V-474, revoking Jet Route J-518 and VOR Federal airway V-119,
and establishing RNAV route Q-178. The Air Traffic Service (ATS) route
amendments, revocations, and establishment are required due to the
planned decommissioning of the Indian Head, PA, VOR and are described
below.
    J-518: J-518 extends between the Dryer, OH, VOR/Distance Measuring
Equipment (VOR/DME) and the Baltimore, MD, VORTAC via the Indian Head,
PA, VORTAC. The route is removed in its entirety.
    Q-178: Q-178 is a new RNAV route extending between the Dryer, OH,
VOR/DME and the Baltimore, MD, VORTAC via the LEJOY, PA, Fix located
approximately 4 nautical miles (NM) northwest of the Indian Head
VORTAC. The new Q-178 provides the high altitude enroute structure
necessary to replace the loss of J-518 and maintain the connectivity to
multiple instrument approach procedures for various airports.
    V-119: V-119 extends between the Parkersburg, WV, VOR/DME and the
Indian Head, PA, VORTAC. The airway is removed in its entirety.
    V-268: V-268 extends between the intersection of the Morgantown,
WV, VOR/DME 010[deg] and Johnstown, PA, VOR/DME 260[deg] radials (NESTO
Fix) and the Augusta, ME, VOR/DME. The airspace within restricted area
R-4001B and the airspace below 2,000 feet mean sea level (MSL) outside
the United States is excluded. The airway segment overlying the Indian
Head VORTAC between the NESTO Fix and the Hagerstown, MD, VOR is
removed. As amended, the airway extends between the Hagerstown VOR and
the Augusta VOR/DME. The exclusionary language remains unchanged.
    V-474: V-474 extends between the intersection of the Morgantown,
WV, VOR/DME 010[deg] and Johnstown, PA, VOR/DME 260[deg] radials (NESTO
Fix) and the Modena, PA, VORTAC. The airway segment overlying the
Indian Head VORTAC between the NESTO Fix and the St. Thomas, PA, VORTAC
is removed. As amended, the airway extends between the St. Thomas
VORTAC and the Modena VORTAC.
    The NAVAID radials listed in the ATS route descriptions below are
unchanged and stated in degrees True north.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore: (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that
only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified
that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action of amending VOR Federal
airways V-268 and V-474, revoking Jet Route J-518 and VOR Federal
airway V-119, and establishing RNAV route Q-178, due to the planned
decommissioning of the VOR portion of the Indian Head, PA, VORTAC
NAVAID, qualifies for categorical exclusion under the National
Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and its implementing
regulations at 40 CFR part 1500, and in accordance with FAA Order
1050.1F, Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures, paragraph 5-
6.5a, which categorically excludes from further environmental impact
review rulemaking actions that designate or modify classes of airspace
areas, airways, routes, and reporting points (see 14 CFR part 71,
Designation of Class A, B, C, D, and E Airspace Areas; Air Traffic
Service Routes; and Reporting Points); and paragraph 5-6.5k, which
categorically excludes from further environmental impact review the
publication of existing air traffic control procedures that do not
essentially change existing tracks, create new tracks, change altitude,
or change concentration of aircraft on these tracks. As such, this
action is not expected to result in any potentially significant
environmental impacts. In accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, paragraph
5-2 regarding Extraordinary Circumstances, the FAA has reviewed this
action for factors and circumstances in which a normally categorically
excluded action may have a significant environmental impact requiring
further analysis. The FAA has determined that no extraordinary
circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an environmental
assessment or environmental impact study.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Amendment

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

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

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

Paragraph 2004 Jet Routes.

* * * * *

J-518 [Removed]

* * * * *

Paragraph 2006 United States Area Navigation Routes.

* * * * *

Q-178 Dryer, OH (DJB) to Baltimore, MD (BAL) [New]
Dryer, OH (DJB)                                 VOR/DME                        (Lat. 41[deg]21'29.03'' N, long. 082[deg]09'43.09'' W)
LEJOY, PA                                       FIX                            (Lat. 40[deg]00'12.22'' N, long. 079[deg]24'53.61'' W)
Baltimore, MD (BAL)                             VORTAC                         (Lat. 39[deg]10'15.83'' N, long. 076[deg]39'40.52'' W)

* * * * *

Paragraph 6010(a) Domestic VOR Federal airways.

* * * * *

V-119 [Removed]

* * * * *

V-268 [Amended]

    From Hagerstown, MD; Westminster, MD; Baltimore, MD; INT
Baltimore 093[deg] and Smyrna, DE, 262[deg] radials; Smyrna; INT
Smyrna 086[deg] and Sea Isle, NJ, 050[deg] radials; INT Sea Isle
050[deg] and Hampton, NY, 223[deg] radials; Hampton; Sandy Point,
RI; INT Sandy Point 031[deg] and Kennebunk, ME, 180[deg] radials;
INT Kennebunk 180[deg] and Boston, MA, 032[deg] radials; INT Boston
032[deg] and Augusta, ME, 195[deg] radials; to Augusta. The airspace
within R-4001B and the airspace below 2,000 feet MSL outside the
United States is excluded.
* * * * *

V-474 [Amended]

    From St. Thomas, PA; INT St. Thomas 088[deg] and Modena, PA,
274[deg] radials; to Modena.
* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, on March 20, 2023.
Brian Konie,
Acting Manager, Airspace Rules and Regulations.
[FR Doc. 2023-06102 Filed 3-24-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: September 25, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 185)]
[Notices]
[Page 54498-54499]
[DOCID:fr25se07-89]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-56468; File No. SR-NSCC-2007-11]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Securities Clearing
Corporation; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change To Allow As-of Fixed
Income Trades To Be Processed in the Continuous Net Settlement System

 September 19, 2007.

I. Introduction

    On July 12, 2007, the National Securities Clearing Corporation
(``NSCC'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') proposed rule change SR-NSCC-2007-11 pursuant to
Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'').\1\
Notice of the proposal was published in the Federal Register on August
20, 2007.\2\ The Commission received no comment letters. For the
reasons discussed below, the Commission is approving the proposed rule
change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56250(August 14, 2007),
72 FR 46528.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description

    NSCC is modifying its procedures to allow as-of fixed income trades
to be

processed in NSCC's Continuous Net Settlement (``CNS'') system.
    When NSCC revised and updated CNS in 2004 (referred to as the ``CNS
Rewrite''), it provided the capability on any settlement day to take in
and process transactions due for settlement that day provided the
trades are recorded or compared prior to an established cut-off time in
the morning.\3\ This capability is currently provided for as-of equity
transactions but has not yet been expanded to as-of fixed income
transactions.\4\ Rather, settlement of as-of fixed income corporate
debt, municipal, and unit investment trust (``UIT'') trades (corporate
debt, municipal, and UIT trades are collectively referred to as ``CMU''
trades) compared on or after their designated settlement date currently
occurs on the business day following the day they are compared. Given
that settlement risks associated with CMU trades would be reduced if
they settled on an accelerated basis in the same manner that as-of
equity trades are settled, NSCC is enhancing its fixed income
processing to permit same day settlement of as-of fixed income
transactions.\5\ To accomplish this, NSCC is amending Procedure II
(Trade Comparison and Recording Service) so that CNS-eligible as-of CMU
trades matched on or after their originally designated settlement date
will be processed in CNS on the day they are submitted for comparison
so long as they compare prior to the cut-off time established for same
day settlement, which currently is 11:30 a.m.\6\ As-of trades not
eligible for CNS processing will settle on a trade-for-trade basis.
Trades that match after the designated cut-off time will continue to be
assigned a settlement date of the next business day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50026 (July15, 2004), 69
FR 43650 [File No. SR-NSCC-2004-01].
    \4\ NSCC's systems did not have the capacity forsame day
settling trades for fixed income transactions in 2004.
    \5\ The settlement of cash and next day CMU tradeswhich are
compared by NSCC will continue to be the responsibility of the
parties to the trades.
    \6\ In addition, references in Procedure VII (CNSAccounting
Operation) that currently note that debt securities are not eligible
for such accelerated settlement will be removed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, because these trades are effectively guaranteed upon
comparison, risk associated with the trades will be mitigated through
the existing component of the Clearing Fund formula, as set forth in
Procedure XV (Clearing Fund Formula and Other Matters), that is
designed to mitigate the risk to NSCC associated with trades that are
processed on a settlement cycle shorter than three days. Under this
component, activity specified for a shortened settlement cycle is
isolated, and a charge is calculated.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The component calculates a charge based on theaverage of a
member's charges for the specified activity on the three days with
the highest charges calculated for the specified activity over the
most recent twenty day period. Securities Exchange Act Release No.
54816 (November 27, 2006), 71 FR 69604 [File No. SR-NSCC-2006-09].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion

    Section 19(b) of the Act directs the Commission to approve a
proposed rule change of a self-regulatory organization if it finds that
such proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the
Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to such
organization. Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act requires that the rules
of a clearing agency be designed to promote the prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of securities transactions.\8\ The Commission
believes that NSCC's rule change is consistent with this Section
because it should facilitate the prompt and accurate clearance and
settlement of securities by increasing automated trade processing and
by expanding the types of trades eligible for CNS netting and NSCC
settlement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the
proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and
in particular Section 17A of the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder. In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission
considered the proposal's impact on efficiency, competition, and
capital formation.
    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,
that the proposed rule change (File No. SR-NSCC-2007-11) be and hereby
is approved.

    For the Commission by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-18825 Filed 9-24-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 175 (Friday, September 9, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55988-55989]
[FR Doc No: 2011-23113]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-65252; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2011-119]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
Regarding a Clarifying Amendment To Direct Connectivity Services

September 2, 2011.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that, on August 31, 2011, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (the ``Exchange''
or ``NASDAQ'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III, below, which Items have been prepared by NASDAQ. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes a clarifying amendment to Exchange Rule 7051
regarding the Exchange's direct connectivity services. The text of the
proposed rule change is available at http://nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com/,
at the Exchange's principal office, and at the Commission's Public
Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange 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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The purpose of this rule filing is to amend Rule 7051 entitled
``Direct Connectivity to Nasdaq'' to clarify the Exchange's direct
connectivity services. Currently, the Exchange assesses fees for direct
10Gb circuit connections, and fees for direct circuit connections
capable of supporting up to 1Gb, for customers who are not co-located
at the Exchange's datacenter.\3\ The Exchange noted in SR-NASDAQ-2010-
077 that it makes available to both co-located and non-co-located
customers direct connections capable of supporting up to 1Gb, with per
connection monthly fees of $500 for co-located customers and $1000 for
non co-located customers.\4\ Monthly fees are higher for non co-located
customers because direct connection requires the Exchange to provide
cabinet space and middleware for those customers' third-party vendors
to connect to the datacenter and, ultimately, to the trading system.\5\
The Exchange also assesses an optional installation fee of $925 if the
customer chooses to use an on-site router (collectively ``Direct
Connectivity Fees'').\6\ The Exchange provides direct connect services
and assesses fees through NASDAQ Technology Services, LLC, as it does
with similar co-location services.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62663 (August 9,
2010), 75 FR 49543 (August 13, 2010) (SR-NASDAQ-2010-077).
    \4\ Id. at page 5 and page 8.
    \5\ Id.
    \6\ Id.
    \7\ See Exchange Rule 7034(b), Connectivity to Nasdaq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Subsequently, the Exchange amended these Direct Connectivity Fees
to establish pricing for customers who are not co-located in the
Exchange's data center, but require shared cabinet space and power for
optional routers, switches, or modems to support their direct circuit
connections. The Exchange assesses customers who are not co-located in
the Exchange's data center monthly fees for space based on a height
unit of approximately two inches high, commonly call a ``U'' space and
a maximum power of 125 Watts per U space.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64440 (May 9, 2011),
76 FR 28262 (May 16, 2011) (SR-NASDAQ-2011-061).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange now seeks to add clarifying text to Exchange Rule 7051
to state that the direct connectivity services are provided by NASDAQ
Technology Services, LLC. The Exchange's proposal is the result of its
desire to prominently place language in the Exchange Rule 7051 to make
transparent that the connectivity services are provided by NASDAQ
Technology Services, LLC. Such change will assist with easy
identification of items not serviced, and billed, by the Exchange. This
change merely codifies the practice of the Exchange.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\9\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \10\ in
particular, in that it is designed to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism
of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general
to protect investors and the public interest. The Exchange believes the
proposed amendment to Exchange Rule 7051 makes transparent that the
direct connectivity services are provided by NASDAQ Technology
Services, LLC. The Exchange believes that this clarifying amendment
will benefit all market participants by making transparent the source
of the direct connectivity services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \10\ 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
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act.\11\ At any time within 60 days of the filing
of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily
suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such
action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the
protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the

purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the
Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the
proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(a)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2011-119 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2011-119. 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 website
viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between
the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be
available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the
Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the
Commission does not edit personal identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-
NASDAQ-2011-119 and should be submitted on or before September 30,
2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-23113 Filed 9-8-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 176 (Tuesday, September 11, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45925-45926]
[FR Doc No: 2018-19762]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0103; FRL-9983-58-OAR]

Proposed Information Collection Request; Comment Request; Diesel
Emissions Reduction Act (DERA) Rebate Program; EPA ICR No. 2461.03, OMB
Control No. 2060-0686 Renewal

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency is planning to submit an
information collection request (ICR), ``Diesel Emissions Reduction Act
(DERA) Rebate Program'' (EPA ICR No. 2461.03, OMB Control No. 2060-0686
Renewal) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and
approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. Before doing
so, EPA is soliciting public comments on specific aspects of the
proposed information collection as described below. This is a proposed
extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through March 31,
2019. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required
to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before November 13, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2012-0103, online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), by
email to [email protected], or by mail to: EPA Docket Center,
Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jason Wilcox, Office of Transportation
and Air Quality, (Mail Code: 6406A), Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: 202-
343-9571; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents which explain in detail
the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the
public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA is soliciting
comments and information to enable it to: (i) Evaluate whether the
proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility; (ii) evaluate the accuracy of
the Agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of
information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions
used; (iii) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (iv) minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who are to respond, including
through the use of appropriate automated electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection techniques or other forms of information
technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. EPA
will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as appropriate.
The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for review and
approval. At that time, EPA will issue another Federal Register notice
to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to
submit additional comments to OMB.
    Abstract: This is an extension of the current Information
Collection Request (ICR) for the Diesel Emissions Reduction Act program
(DERA) authorized by Title VII, Subtitle G (Sections 791 to 797) of the
Energy Policy Act of 2005 (Pub. L. 109-58), as amended by the Diesel
Emissions Reduction Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-364), codified at 42
U.S.C. 16131 et seq. DERA provides the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) with the authority to award grants, rebates or low-cost revolving
loans on a competitive basis to eligible entities to fund the costs of
projects that significantly reduce diesel emissions from mobile sources
through implementation of a certified engine configuration, verified
technology, or emerging technology. Eligible mobile sources include
buses (including school buses), medium heavy-duty or heavy heavy-duty
diesel trucks, marine engines, locomotives, or nonroad engines or
diesel vehicles or equipment used in construction, handling of cargo
(including at ports or airports), agriculture, mining, or energy
production. In addition, eligible entities may also use funds awarded
for programs or projects to reduce long-duration idling using verified
technology involving a vehicle or equipment described above. The
objective of the assistance under this program is to achieve
significant reductions in diesel emissions in terms of tons of
pollution produced and reductions in diesel emissions exposure,
particularly from fleets operating in areas designated by the
Administrator as poor air quality areas.
    EPA uses approved procedures and forms to collect necessary
information to operate its grant and rebate programs. EPA has been
providing rebates under DERA since Fiscal Year 2012. EPA is requesting
an extension of the current ICR, which is currently approved through
March 31, 2019, for forms needed to collect necessary information to
operate a rebate program as authorized by Congress under the DERA
program.
    EPA collects information from applicants to the DERA rebate
program. Information collected is used to ensure eligibility of
applicants and engines to receive funds under DERA, and to calculate
estimated and actual emissions benefits that result from activities
funded with rebates as required in DERA's authorizing legislation.
    Form numbers: 2060-0686.
    Respondents/affected entities: Entities potentially affected by
this action are those interested in applying for a rebate under EPA's
Diesel Emission Reduction Act (DERA) Rebate Program and include but are
not limited to the following NAICS (North American Industry
Classification System) codes: 23 Construction; 482 Rail Transportation;
483 Water Transportation; 484 Truck Transportation; 485 Transit and
Ground Passenger Transportation; 4854 School and Employee Bus
Transportation; 48831 Port and Harbor Operations; 61111 Elementary and
Secondary Schools; 61131 Colleges, Universities, and Professional
Schools; 9211 Executive, Legislative, and Other Government Support; and
9221 Justice, Public Order, and Safety Activities.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Voluntary.

    Estimated number of respondents: 500-1000 (total).
    Frequency of response: Voluntary as needed.
    Total estimated burden: 2,945 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: $103,197.33 (per year), includes $0
annualized capital or operation and maintenance costs.
    Changes in estimates: There is an increase of 118 hours in the
total estimated respondent burden compared with the ICR currently
approved by OMB. This increase is due to a higher reported burden by
the two responses to consultation outreach. The higher burden reported
by these past respondents was weighted against previous estimates for
the latest burden estimate.

    Dated: August 29, 2018.
Karl Simon,
Director, Transportation and Climate Division, Office of Air and
Radiation.
[FR Doc. 2018-19762 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P