[Federal Register: January 6, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 3)]
[Notices]
[Page 474-475]
[DOCID:fr06ja09-69]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

Upon written request, copies available from: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy, Washington, DC
20549-0213.

Extension:
    Form 24F-2; SEC File No. 270-399 ; OMB Control No. 3235-0456.

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the ``Commission'') has submitted to the Office of Management and
Budget a request for extension of the previously approved collection of
information discussed below.
    Rule 24f-2 (17 CFR 270.24f-2) under the Investment Company Act of
1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a) requires any open-end management companies
(``mutual funds''), unit investment trusts (``UITs'') or face-amount
certificate companies

(collectively, ``funds'') deemed to have registered an indefinite
amount of securities to file, not later than 90 days after the end of
any fiscal year in which it has publicly offered such securities, Form
24F-2 (17 CFR 274.24) with the Commission. Form 24F-2 is the annual
notice of securities sold by funds that accompanies the payment of
registration fees with respect to the securities sold during the fiscal
year.
    The Commission estimates that 5707 funds file Form 24F-2 on the
required annual basis. The average annual burden per respondent for
Form 24F-2 is estimated to be two hours. The total annual burden for
all respondents to Form 24F-2 is estimated to be 11,414 hours. The
estimate of average burden hours is made solely for the purposes of the
Paperwork Reduction Act, and is not derived from a comprehensive or
even a representative survey or study of the costs of Commission rules.
    Compliance with the collection of information required by Form 24F-
2 is mandatory. The Form 24F-2 filing that must be made to the
Commission is available to the public. An agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of
information unless it displays a currently valid control number.
    Please direct general comments regarding the above information to
the following persons: (i) Desk Officer for the Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10102, New Executive
Office Building, Washington, DC 20503 or send an e-mail to: Shagufta_
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and (ii) Charles Boucher, Director/CIO, Securities
and Exchange Commission, C/O Shirley Martinson, 6432 General Green Way,
Alexandria, VA 22312; or send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Comments must be submitted to OMB within 30 days of this notice.

    Dated: December 29, 2008.
Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-31353 Filed 1-5-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 222 (Friday, November 18, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69376-69378]
[FR Doc No: 2022-25230]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-96322; File No. SR-NYSEARCA-2022-76]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule 7.31-
E

November 15, 2022.
    Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on November 2, 2022, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II
below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. 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 to amend Rule 7.31-E regarding Discretionary
Pegged Orders. The proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, 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 self-regulatory organization
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 those 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 parts 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 Exchange proposes to (1) amend Rule 7.31-E to delete Commentary
.03 to end the temporary suspension of the Discretionary Pegged Order,
and (2) amend Rule 7.31-E(h)(3) to modify the operation of the
Discretionary Pegged Order.
    The Discretionary Pegged Order is a non-displayed order to buy
(sell) that is pegged to the same side of the PBBO and assigned a
working price equal to the lower (higher) of the midpoint of the PBBO
(the ``Midpoint Price'') or the limit price of the order.\3\ A
Discretionary Pegged Order will exercise the least amount of discretion
necessary from its working price to its discretionary price (defined as
the lower (higher) of the Midpoint Price or the limit price of the
order) to trade with contra-side interest. Current Rule 7.31-E(h)(3)(C)
provides that a Discretionary Pegged Order will not exercise discretion
if the PBBO is determined to be unstable via a ``quote instability
calculation'' that assesses the probability of a change to the PBB or
PBO. Specifically, as set forth in current Rule 7.31-E(h)(3)(D), the
Exchange uses the quote instability calculation along with real-time
relative quoting activity of protected quotations to assess the
probability of an imminent change to the PBBO (the ``quote instability
factor''). When the quoting activity meets predefined criteria
described in Rule 7.31-E(h)(3)(D)(i)(A) through (C) and the quote
instability factor calculated is greater than the Exchange's quote
instability threshold (defined in Rule 7.31-E(h)(3)(D)(i)(D)(2)), the
Exchange treats the quote as unstable. The quote stability calculation
utilizes quote stability coefficients and quote stability variables, as
defined in Rules 7.31-E(h)(3)(D)(i)(D)(1)(a) and (b). In July 2022, the
Exchange modified the quote stability calculation to incorporate
updated quote stability coefficients that would allow the quote
stability calculation to more accurately identify changes to the
PBBO.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Rule 7.31-E(h)(3). As defined in NYSE Arca Rule 1.1,
``PBBO'' means the Best Protected Bid and the Best Protected Offer.
Rule 1.1 also defines ``PBB'' as the highest Protected Bid and
``PBO'' as the lowest Protected Offer.
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 95154 (June 24,
2022), 87 FR 39134 (June 30, 2022) (SR-NYSEArca-2022-13) (Notice of
Filing of Amendment No. 2 and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of
a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 2, To Amend
Rule 7.31-E(h)(3) Relating to Discretionary Pegged Orders).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

End of Temporary Suspension
    In August 2022, the Exchange added Commentary .03 to Rule 7.31-E to
provide for the temporary suspension of the Discretionary Pegged
Order.\5\ The Exchange determined to temporarily suspend use of the
Discretionary Pegged Order to evaluate system performance impacts
following the modification of the quote stability coefficients, as
described above. Commentary .03 to Rule 7.31-E provides that the
Exchange will submit a proposed rule filing to end the temporary
suspension and will provide notice of the end of the suspension period
by Trader Update.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 95584 (August 23,
2022), 87 FR 52826 (August 29, 2022) (Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change to Amend Rule 7.31-E).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange now proposes to end the temporary suspension period,
as it has assessed system performance impact and is prepared to resume
offering the Discretionary Pegged Order, as modified by this filing.
The Exchange also proposes to delete Commentary .03 from 7.31-E to
remove text that would no longer have application once the temporary
suspension is lifted.
Modification of Discretionary Pegged Orders
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 7.31-E(h)(3) to modify the
operation of Discretionary Pegged Orders following the end of the
temporary suspension period. As noted above, the temporary suspension
period provided the Exchange with an opportunity to evaluate the impact
of the order type on system performance. Based on the Exchange's
assessment of such impact, and, specifically, the system resources
required to perform the quote stability calculation, the Exchange now
proposes to modify Rule 7.31-E(h)(3) to provide that the Discretionary
Pegged Order would not be restricted from exercising discretion during
periods of quote instability, thereby eliminating the need to perform
the quote stability calculation.
    As proposed, the Discretionary Pegged Order would operate as
defined in Rule 7.31-E(h)(3) and as specified in current Rules 7.31-
E(h)(3)(A), (B), and (E), without any changes except that the order
would continue to exercise the least amount of price discretion

necessary from its working price to its discretionary price to trade
with contra-side orders on the NYSE Arca Book without regard to
potential quote instability. The Exchange thus proposes to delete the
clause beginning with ``except'' in the last sentence of current Rule
7.31-E(h)(3). In addition, because the Exchange proposes to permit
Discretionary Pegged Orders to exercise discretion without considering
potential quote instability, the Exchange would no longer perform the
quote instability calculation to assess the probability of an imminent
change to the PBBO or identify periods of quote instability. To effect
this change, the Exchange proposes to delete current Rules 7.31-
E(h)(3)(C) and (D), including the subparagraphs thereunder. The
Exchange also proposes to renumber current Rule 7.31-E(h)(3)(E) as Rule
7.31-E(h)(3)(C) to reflect those deletions.
    Although the Discretionary Pegged Order, as modified, would no
longer provide price protection during periods of quote instability,
the Exchange believes that it would still provide ETP Holders with the
flexibility and benefits of an order type that can exercise discretion
to trade with contra-side interest. The Exchange notes that the
Discretionary Pegged Order, as modified, would operate similarly to
order types currently offered by other equities exchanges.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See, e.g., Cboe EDGA Exchange, Inc. Rule 11.8(e) (defining
the MidPoint Discretionary Order as a limit order to buy or sell
that is pegged to the NBBO with discretion to execute at prices up
or down to and including the midpoint of the NBBO); Cboe EDGX
Exchange, Inc. Rule 11.8(g) (same).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because of the technology changes associated with this proposed
rule change, the Exchange will announce the end of the temporary
suspension and availability of the Discretionary Pegged Order, as
proposed in this filing, by Trader Update. Subject to effectiveness of
this rule filing, the Exchange will implement the changes described
herein in the fourth quarter of 2022.
2. Statutory Basis
    The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the
Act,\7\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5),\8\
in particular, because it is designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with
persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed change to end the temporary
suspension of Discretionary Pegged Orders and delete Commentary .03
would promote just and equitable principles of trade and remove
impediments to, and perfect the mechanism of, a free and open market
and a national market system because it would permit the Exchange to
resume offering the Discretionary Pegged Order to ETP Holders and
remove rule text that would no longer have application following the
end of the suspension period. Furthermore, as discussed above, the
temporary suspension of the Discretionary Pegged Order allowed the
Exchange an opportunity to evaluate system performance impacts.
Accordingly, the Exchange believes that the proposed change to modify
the operation of the Discretionary Pegged Order, further to such
assessment, would remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanism of,
a free and open market and a national market system, as well as protect
investors and the public interest, by continuing to provide ETP Holders
with the benefits of an order type that can exercise discretion to
trade with contra-side interest, without a quote instability
calculation that would restrict such order from exercising discretion
during periods of quote instability. The Exchange also believes that
the proposed modification of the Discretionary Pegged Order would
remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanism of, a free and open
market and a national market system by modifying the Discretionary
Pegged Order to function similarly to discretionary orders currently
offered by other equities exchanges.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See note 6, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange believes that
the proposed change would promote competition by ending the temporary
suspension of the Discretionary Pegged Order and making the order type
once again available to ETP Holders, as proposed. The proposed
modification of the Discretionary Pegged Order would also promote
competition by permitting the Exchange to offer ETP Holders an order
type that can exercise discretion to trade with contra-side interest
and would not be restricted from doing so by a quote stability
calculation. The Exchange also believes that the proposed modification
to the operation of the Discretionary Pegged Order could promote
competition because the order type would function similarly to order
types currently offered by other equities exchanges.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \11\ and
subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires the Exchange to give the Commission written notice of its
intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief
description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five
business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule
change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The
Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \13\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\14\ the Commission
may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked
the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay to allow the
Exchange to end the temporary suspension and modify the Discretionary
Pegged Order as soon as the technology associated with those proposed
changes is available and make the Discretionary Pegged Order available
for use by interested ETP Holders. The Exchange states that the
proposed changes would allow the Exchange to end the temporary
suspension of an approved order type and modify the order type to
operate similarly to discretionary orders

currently offered by other equities exchanges. The Commission believes
that waiver of the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest because the proposal
does not raise any new or novel issues. Accordingly, the Commission
hereby waives the 30-day operative delay and designates the proposal
operative upon filing.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \15\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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 email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2022-76 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2022-76. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email 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 website (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 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 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. Persons
submitting comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit
personal identifying information from comment submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2022-76 and
should be submitted on or before December 9, 2022.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-25230 Filed 11-17-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: December 17, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 243)]
[Notices]
[Page 76620]
[DOCID:fr17de08-47]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 13218-000; Project No. 13217-000]

Calligan Power, LLC; Renewable Energy Development, LLC; Notice of
Competing Preliminary Permit Applications Accepted for Filing and
Soliciting Comment, Motions To Intervene, and Competing Applications

December 9, 2008.
    Calligan Power, LLC , and Renewable Energy Development, LLC filed
applications, on May 1, 2008, pursuant to section 4(f) of the Federal
Power Act, proposing to study the feasibility of the Calligan Project,
to be located on Calligan Creek, in King County, Washington.
    The proposed Calligan Project by Calligan Power, LLC consists of:
(1) A proposed 65-foot-long, 8-foot-high weir diversion structure; (2)
a proposed reservoir having a surface area of 0.3 acres and a storage
capacity of 1 acre-foot and normal water surface elevation of 2215 feet
National Geographic Vertical Datum (NGVD); (3) a proposed 5,200-foot-
long, 30-inch-diameter steel penstock, (4) a proposed powerhouse
containing one new generating unity having an installed capacity of 4.5
megawatts; (5) a proposed 22,500-foot-long, 34.5 kilovolt transmission
line; and (6) appurtenant facilities. The proposed Calligan Project
would have an average annual generation of 17 gigawatt-hours..
    The proposed Calligan Project by Renewable Energy Development, LLC
consists of: (1) A proposed 60-foot-long, 9-foot-high concrete
diversion structure; (2) a proposed reservoir having a surface area of
0.4 acres and a storage capacity of 1 acre-foot and normal water
surface elevation of 2221 feet mean sea level; (3) a proposed 6,400-
foot-long, 40-inch-diameter steel penstock, (4) a proposed powerhouse
containing one new generating unity having an installed capacity of 7
megawatts; (5) a proposed 22,500-foot-long, 34.5 kilovolt transmission
line; and (6) appurtenant facilities. The proposed Calligan Project
would have an average annual generation of 25 gigawatt-hours..
    Applicants Contact: For Calligan Power, LLC: Mr. Jason M. Hines,
Black Brook Environmental, Inc., 100 Harris Avenue, Bellingham, WA
98225,<PHONE_NUMBER>. For Renewable Energy Development, LLC: Laurin
Schweet, Renewable Energy Development, LLC, P.O. Box 50061, Bellevue,
WA 98015,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    FERC Contact: Robert Bell,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
Comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and competing
applications may be filed electronically via the Internet. See 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
under the ``eFiling'' link. If unable to be filed electronically,
documents may be paper-filed. To paper-file, an original and eight
copies should be mailed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. For
more information on how to submit these types of filings please go to
the Commission's Web site located at http://www.ferc.gov/filing-
comments.asp. More information about this project can be viewed or
printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of the Commission's Web site at http:/
/www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the docket number (P-
13218 or P-13217) in the docket number field to access the document.
For assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3372.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-29858 Filed 12-16-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: December 11, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 237)]
[Notices]
[Page 70357-70360]
[DOCID:fr11de07-82]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-56876; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2007-068]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing of Amendment No. 2 to a Proposed Rule Change To Amend
the Limited Liability Company Agreement of The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of the Proposed Rule Change, as
Modified by Amendment Nos. 1 and 2

November 30, 2007.

I. Introduction

    On July 20, 2007, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') a proposed rule change, pursuant to section 19(b)(1)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\2\ to amend its Limited Liability Company Agreement (``LLC
Agreement''). On September 26, 2007, Nasdaq filed Amendment No. 1 to
the proposed rule change. The proposed rule change, as modified by
Amendment No. 1, was published for comment in the Federal Register on
October 5, 2007.\3\ The Commission received no comments on the
proposal. On November 16, 2007, Nasdaq filed Amendment No. 2 to the
proposed rule change (``Amendment No. 2''). This notice and order
notices Amendment No. 2; solicits comments from interested persons on
Amendment No. 2; and approves the proposed rule change, as amended, on
an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56581 (September 28,
2007), 72 FR 57083 (``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

    Nasdaq proposes to amend its LLC Agreement, which includes its by-
laws (`` By-Laws'') to: (1) Revise the process by which its directors
(``Directors'') are nominated and elected; (2) amend the compositional
requirements for its board of directors (``Board'') and several
committees; and (3) make certain other changes as described below.

A. Election of Fair Representation Directors

    Nasdaq proposes to amend its LLC Agreement, including its By-Laws,
to revise the process by which the members of its Board are nominated
and elected. Section 6(b)(3) of the Act \4\ requires a national
securities exchange to establish rules that assure a fair
representation of its members in the selection of its directors.
Nasdaq's LLC Agreement currently provides that twenty percent of the
directors on the Board will be ``Member Representative Directors.'' \5\
The Board appoints a ``Member Nominating Committee,'' which nominates
and creates a list of candidates for each Member Representative
Director position on the Board, and nominates candidates for
appointment by the Board for each vacant or new position on a committee
that is to be filled with a Member Representative under Nasdaq's By-
Laws.\6\ Additional candidates may be added to the list of candidates
for Member Representative Director positions if a Nasdaq Exchange
Member submits a timely and duly executed written nomination to the
Secretary of the Exchange.\7\ These candidates, together with those
nominated by the Member Nominating Committee, are then presented to
Exchange members for election.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(3).
    \5\ ``Member Representative Director'' means a Director ``who
has been elected or appointed after having been nominated by the
Member Nominating Committee or by a Nasdaq Member * * * '' See
Exchange By-Laws Article I(q).
    \6\ See Nasdaq By-Laws Article II, Section 1(b) and 3, and
Article III, Section 6(b).
    \7\ See Nasdaq By-Laws Article II, Section 1(c).
    \8\ See Nasdq By-Laws Article II, Section 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the proposal, the Board will continue to appoint a Member
Nominating Committee, which will nominate candidates for each Member
Representative Director position on the Board, and nominate candidates
for appointment by the Board for each vacant or new position on a
committee that is to be filled with a Member Representative under
Nasdaq's By-Laws. In Amendment No. 2,\9\ Nasdaq proposes to add the
requirement that, in appointing the Member Nominating Committee, the
Board will consult with representatives of members of the Exchange.\10\
Also, members will continue to be able to add candidates to the list of
candidates for Member Representative Director positions through the
petitions process. The timing and method for the petition process will
not change pursuant to the proposal. The list of candidates for Member
Representative Director positions and the election date will be
announced by the Exchange in a Notice to Members and in a prominent
location on a publicly accessible Web site. Such announcement also will
describe the procedures for Exchange members to nominate candidates for
election at the next annual meeting.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The text of Amendment No. 2 is available at Nasdaq's Web
site http://nasdaq.complinet.com, at Nasdaq, and at the Commission's

Public Reference Room.
    \10\ See Proposed Nasdaq By-Laws Article III, Section 6(b)(iii).
    \11\ See Proposed Nasdaq By-Laws Article II, Section 1(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If the list of candidates (comprised of those candidates nominated
by the Member Nominating Committee and any candidates added through the
petition process) exceeds the number of positions to be elected, a
formal notice of the election date and list of candidates will be sent
by the Exchange to its members as of the record date at least 10 days,
but no more than 60 days, prior to the election date.\12\ As is
currently the case, each Exchange member that is eligible to vote will
have the right to cast one vote for each Member Representative Director
position to be filled, and the persons on the list of candidates who
receive the

most votes will be elected to the Member Representative Positions.\13\
If there is only one candidate for each Member Representative position
to be filled, the Member Representative Directors will be elected from
the list of candidates by The Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc., Nasdaq's
parent company.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Proposed Nasdaq By-Laws Article II, Section 1(a) and
(c).
    \13\ See Proposed Nasdaq By-Laws Article II, Section 2. Nasdaq
is also amending By-Laws Article II, Section 2 to provide that votes
may be cast until 11:59 p.m. (rather than 5 p.m.) on the election
date. Id.
    \14\ See Proposed Nasdaq By-Laws Article II, Section (c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Board and Committee Compositional Requirements

    Nasdaq proposes to make several changes to its By-Laws pertaining
to the compositional requirements of its Board and committees thereof.
    First, Nasdaq's By-Laws currently require that twenty percent of
its directors shall be Member Representative Directors.\15\ Nasdaq
proposes to amend the LLC Agreement to require that at least twenty
percent of Nasdaq's directors shall be Member Representative
Directors.\16\ Thus, Nasdaq would not be required to remove a
previously elected Member Representative Director if the Board's size
was reduced.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Nasdaq LLC Agreement, Section 9.
    \16\ See Proposed Nasdaq LLC Agreement, Section 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, Nasdaq proposes to amend the compositional requirements of
its Quality of Markets Committee (``QMC''). Currently,\17\ Nasdaq's QMC
must be comprised of an equal number of Industry \18\ and Non-Industry
Directors.\19\ Nasdaq proposes to amend this provision such that the
number of Non-Industry members on the QMC must equal or exceed the
number of Industry members and Member Representative members.\20\ The
Exchange represents that this change is consistent with certain
undertakings made by Nasdaq with regard to the composition of this
committee.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Nasdaq By-Laws Article III, Section 6(c)(ii).
    \18\ Generally, an ``Industry Director'' is, among other things,
a Director that is or has been an officer, director, employee, or
owner of a broker-dealer. In addition, persons who have a consulting
or employment relationship with the Exchange, its affiliates, or the
National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc (``NASD'') (n/k/a
Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. or FINRA) are
considered ``Industry.'' See Nasdaq By-Laws Article I(l).
    \19\ ``Non-Industry Director'' means a ``Director (excluding
Staff Directors) who is (i) a Public Director; (ii) and officer or
employee of an issuer of securities listed on the national
securities exchange operated by the [Exchange]; or (iii) any other
individual who would not be an Industry Director.'' See Nasdaq By-
Laws Article I(v).
    ``Public Director'' means a ``Director who has no material
business relationship with a broker or dealer, the [Exchange] or its
affiliates, or the NASD.'' See Nasdaq By-Laws Article I(y).
    \20\ See Proposed Nasdaq By-Laws Article III, Section 6(c)(ii).
    \21\ In the Matter of National Association of Securities
Dealers, Inc., Order Instituting Public Proceedings Pursuant to
Section 19(h)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Making
Findings, and Imposing Remedial Sanctions, Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 37538 (August 8, 1996) (Administrative Proceeding File
No. 3-9056) (``1996 Settlement Order'') (requiring ``at least fifty
percent independent public and non-industry membership'' in the
QMC). Nasdaq was previously bound by the 1996 Settlement Order due
to its status as a subsidiary of the NASD, and in connection with
Nasdaq's Exchange application, Nasdaq submitted a letter to the
Commission affirming that it would comply with the 1996 Settlement
Order, except as specified. See Letter to Robert L.D. Colby, Acting
Director, Division of Market Regulation, Commission, from Edward S.
Knight, Executive Vice President, General Counsel, and Chief
Regulatory Officer, Nasdaq, dated January 11, 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Third, Nasdaq proposes to amend the compositional requirements
applicable to its Arbitration and Mediation Committee (``Arbitration
Committee''), which currently provide that the committee shall consist
of no fewer than 10 and no more than 25 members.\22\ As amended,
Nasdaq's By-Laws would require the committee consist of no fewer than 3
and no more than 10 members.\23\ The balance requirements applicable to
this committee will remain unchanged, consistent with the 1996
Settlement Order.\24\ Nasdaq believes that a reduction in the size of
this committee is appropriate because FINRA manages an arbitration and
mediation program for use of Nasdaq members pursuant to a regulatory
services agreement with FINRA, and because Nasdaq has appointed the
members of FINRA's Arbitration and Mediation Committee to also serve on
Nasdaq's Arbitration Committee.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See Nasdaq By-Laws Article III, Section 6(e)(iii).
    \23\ See Proposed Nasdaq By-Laws Article III, Section 6(e)(iii).
    \24\ See 1996 Settlement Order, supra note 21, (requiring ``at
least fifty percent independent public and non-industry membership''
in the Arbitration Committee).
    \25\ See Notice, supra note 3, at Section II.A.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Fourth, Nasdaq proposes to amend the compositional requirements of
the Nasdaq Review Council (``NRC''), which currently require this
committee to be comprised of no fewer than 12 and no more than 14
members.\26\ As amended, Nasdaq's By-Laws would require the NRC to be
comprised of no fewer than 8 and no more than 12 members.\27\ The
Exchange believes that because Nasdaq and FINRA are parties to an
agreement under Rule 17d-2 of the Act \28\ that allocates
responsibility to FINRA for enforcing a wide range of common rules with
respect to common members, the caseload of the NRC is likely to be
considerably lower than that of the FINRA's comparable committee, the
National Adjudicatory Council. Therefore, Nasdaq believes that reducing
the size of this committee will be consistent with the efficient
discharge of its responsibilities.\29\ Nasdaq is also proposing an
amendment to allow NRC members to serve two consecutive three-year
terms,\30\ consistent with Nasdaq's other appellate review body, the
Nasdaq Listing and Hearing Review Council.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See Nasdaq By-Laws Article VI, Section 2.
    \27\ See Proposed Nasdaq By-Laws Article Article VI, Section 2.
    \28\ 17 CFR 240.17d-2.
    \29\ See Notice, supra note 3, at Section II.A.1.
    \30\ See Proposed Nasdaq By-Laws Article VI, Section 4(c).
    \31\ See Proposed Nasdaq By-Laws Article VI, Section 4(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Other Changes

    Nasdaq is proposing to make various other changes to its LLC
Agreement. Specifically, the proposal would remove out of date
references to the Exchange's initial directors and officers, and
provisions that were applicable to the transitional period between the
formation of Nasdaq and when it commenced operations as a national
securities exchange.\32\ The proposed rule change also amends Nasdaq's
LLC Agreement to provide that amendments to the LLC Agreement
(including the By-Laws) must be approved by the Board and also
reflected in a written agreement executed by The Nasdaq Stock Market,
Inc., as sole member of Nasdaq within the meaning of the Delaware
Limited Liability Company Act. Changes to the LLC Agreement must also
be filed with the Commission pursuant to section 19(b) of the Act.\33\
Further, Nasdaq is amending Article IX, Section 1 of its By-Laws (i) to
make explicit that Nasdaq's Board is authorized to adopt and amend
rules for the required or voluntary arbitration of controversies
between members and between members and customers or others, and (ii)
to delete from the list of the Board's specified authorities the

authority to issue exemptions from, suspend, or cancel Exchange
rules.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ Nasdaq represents that up-to-date information regarding the
current directors of Nasdaq and its parent corporation, The Nasdaq
Stock Market, Inc., is maintained at http://ir.nasdaq.com/directors.cfm (with a link provided from http://www.nasdaq.com). The

Exchange also certifies that information regarding the officers of
Nasdaq is kept up to date and is available to the Commission and the
public upon request, and is filed with the Commission as an
amendment to its Form 1 every three years, as required by Rule 6a-2
under the Act, 17 CFR 240.6a-2. See Notice, supra note 3, at note
10.
    \33\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b).
    \34\ Nasdaq notes that the deletion of a reference to the
Board's authority to issue exemptions from Nasdaq rules should not
be construed to limit Nasdaq's authority under rules that, by their
terms, explicitly authorize waivers or exemptions. See Notice, supra
note 3, at note 15 and accompanying text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the proposal amends Nasdaq's By-Laws to correct
typographical errors.

III. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning Amendment No. 2, including whether Amendment No. 2
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-2007-068 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to Amendment No. 2 to File Number SR-
NASDAQ-2007-068. This file number should be included on the subject
line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your
comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission
will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent

amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule
change that are filed with the Commission, and all written
communications relating to the proposed rule change between the
Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from
the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public
Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official
business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such
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
Amendment No. 2 to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2007-068 and should be
submitted on or before January 2, 2008.

IV. Discussion

    The Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.\35\ In
particular, the Commission finds that the proposal is consistent with
section 6(b)(3) of the Act,\36\ which requires, among other things,
that the rules of an exchange assure a fair representation of its
members in the selection of its directors and administration of its
affairs. The Commission also finds that the proposal is consistent with
section 6(b)(1) of the Act,\37\ which requires, among other things,
that an exchange be so organized and have the capacity to carry out the
purposes of the Act, and to comply and enforce compliance by its
members and persons associated with its members, with the provisions of
the Act, the rules and regulation thereunder, and the rules of the
exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission
notes that it has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
    \36\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(3).
    \37\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission notes that although the Exchange will no longer hold
a member election for Member Representative Directors if the number of
candidates for election does not exceed the number of vacancies,
members will continue to be able to petition to have candidates added
to the list of candidates, as is currently the case. Also, the
Commission notes that should the number of candidates exceed the number
of vacancies, Exchange members will have the opportunity to elect the
candidates to fill the open Member Representative Director positions.
If no such election is required (i.e., the number of candidates equals
the number of position to be filled), The Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc.
will elect the candidates on the list of candidates prepared by the
Member Nominating Committee. Additionally, the Exchange's Board will
now be obligated to consult with Exchange members when appointing
individuals to the Member Nominating Committee. The Commission
previously considered and approved rules of another Exchange that
provide a similar structure for the selection of directors.\38\ In
addition, the Commission believes that the requirement that at least
twenty percent of the directors be Member Representative Directors, and
the means by which Member Representative Directors are to be nominated
and elected, provides for the fair representation of the Exchange's
members in the selection of its directors and administration of its
affairs, consistent with the requirements of section 6(b)(3) of the
Act.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53382 (February 27,
2006), 71 FR 11251 (March 6, 2007) (SR-NYSE-2005-77) (``Release No.
34-53382'') (order granting approval of proposed rule change
relating to NYSE's business combination with Archipelago Holdings,
Inc., which included the bylaws of NYSE Market, Inc.).
    \39\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to the proposal, the Exchange's By-Laws will provide that
the number of Non-Industry members of the Exchange's QMC must equal or
exceed the number of Industry members. The proposal also will reduce
the size of the Exchange's Arbitration Committee and the NRC, but will
not otherwise alter the compositional requirements of, or method for
designating, these committees. The Commission notes that the proposed
compositional balance for the QMC and Arbitration Committee is
consistent with the 1996 Settlement Order requirement that such
committees maintain at least fifty percent independent public and non-
industry membership. The Commission therefore believes that the
proposal is designed to assure that the Exchange be organized and have
the capacity to carry out the purposes of the Act.
    For the foregoing reasons, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule is consistent with the Act.

V. Accelerated Approval

    The Commission finds good cause for approving the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment No. 2, prior to the thirtieth day
after publishing notice of Amendment No. 2 in the Federal Register
pursuant to section 19(b)(2) of the Act.\40\ In Amendment No. 2, Nasdaq
added the that requirement the Board will appoint individuals to the
Member Nominating Committee after appropriate consultation with
Exchange members.\41\ The Commission believes that such a requirement
is consistent with the

requirement under section 6(b)(3) of the Act \42\ that the rules of an
exchange assure a fair representation of its members in the selection
of its directors. The Commission also notes that such a requirement is
consistent with the rules of another exchange, which were approved by
the Commission,\43\ and therefore believes that Amendment No. 2 raises
no new issues. The Commission therefore finds good cause exists to
accelerate approval of the proposed change, as modified by Amendment
No. 2, pursuant to section 19(b)(2) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). Pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act, the Commission may not approve any proposed rule change, or
amendment thereto, prior to the thirtieth day after the date of
publication of the notice thereof, unless the Commission finds good
cause for so doing.
    \41\ The changes pursuant to Amendment No. 2 are discussed more
fully in Section II.A. See supra notes 9 and 10 and accompanying
text.
    \42\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(3).
    \43\ See Article III, Section 5 of the Amended and Restated
Bylaws of NYSE Market, Inc. See also Release No. 34-53382, supra
note 38.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\44\ that the proposed rule change (SR-NASDAQ-2007-068) as modified
by Amendment Nos. 1 and 2, be, and hereby is, approved on an
accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-23917 Filed 12-10-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


Post-harvest

	Tuesday, October 30, 2007	8:00 – 10:00 AM

EPA Determination of Structural Fumigation Emission Profiles	Moderator

	Jeff Dawson/

Steven Weiss

8:00 - 8:10 am	EPA Overview: Jeff Dawson/Steven Weiss

8:10 - 9:00 am	Research Panel Presentations: Eric Winegar, Richard
Reiss, Suresh Prabhakaran, Dirk Maier, Michael  Kaae

9:00 - 10:00 am	Open Discussion

Goal:	The U.S. EPA recently evaluated the potential risks associated
with the post-harvest uses of methyl bromide as well as other
post-harvest fumigant chemicals.  In its effort to develop risk
management decisions for these materials, it has become increasingly
clear that quantitative data of sufficient quality would allow for a
more rigorous determination of how basic factors such as building
design, sealing methods, changing weather conditions, absorptive
properties of treated commodities, and aeration techniques influence
emissions from treated structures during holding times and active
aeration.  Given the regulatory challenges that exist, the development
of emission reduction factors which better reflect modern practices and
conditions are required.  It is envisioned that these factors can be
used to potentially alleviate the regulatory burdens for users who
utilize such approaches as part of their practices.  Examples of such
factors may include:  (1) placement of active aeration outflows; (2)
numbers of active aeration outflows and associated performance criteria;
and (3) influence of building location and design on emissions relative
to surrounding terrain and typical weather conditions during treatments.
 The goal of this session is to begin to summarize available research on
this issue, use this research to identify the critical factors that
should be considered related to emissions reduction, and to begin to
define factors for these parameters.

Questions:

Individual factors that impact fumigant emissions from structures
include aeration methods, building design, climate, and location
relative to topography. What are the most important factors which impact
emissions from treated structures?  Are they independent or do they
impact emission rates in a synergistic manner?  How much impact do
differences in building design and aeration methods have on these
results?

Can parameters be manipulated in a typical commercial production system,
to reduce emissions yet still retain an effective, economically viable
production system?  If so, what techniques can be used to manipulate
emissions from treated structures (e.g., high barrier films, emission
stacks, recovery systems)?

Do data exist that can be used to demonstrate, in a reliable manner,
responses to questions 1 and 2?

Modeling approaches have been suggested as a means for using laboratory
and field-scale data for predicting emissions under varied conditions
based on changes in sealing methods and aeration parameters.   What
model systems can be used for this purpose, if any? What data are
required for the reliable use of such models?

The intent of this session is to provide a public forum where research
and initiatives related to the above goal and questions are presented.
EPA is not asking participants for recommendations to make regulatory
decisions.

Slides for this and other MBAO conference sessions can be viewed at
HYPERLINK "http://mbao.org/"  http://mbao.org/ Pre-plant

	Tuesday, October 30, 2007	3:30 – 5:30 pm

Determination of Soil Fumigant Emission Reduction Factors	Moderator

	Jeff Dawson/

Charles Smith

3:30 - 3:40 pm	EPA Overview: Jeff Dawson/Charles Smith

3:40 - 4:30 pm	Research Panel Presentations: Dan Chellemi,  Dong Wang,
Husein Ajwa, Scott Yates, Steven Cryer

4:30 - 5:30 pm	Open Discussion

Goal:	The U.S. EPA is currently evaluating the potential risks
associated with the pre-plant uses of a variety of soil fumigant
chemicals.  In its effort to develop risk management decisions for these
materials, it has become increasingly clear that quantitative data of
sufficient quality would allow for a more rigorous determination of how
basic factors such as soil moisture, soil temperature, mulch types, or
the percent of organic matter influence emissions at the field level.
Given the regulatory challenges that exist, the development of emission
reduction factors which better reflect modern cultural practices and
conditions are required.  It is envisioned that these factors can be
used to potentially alleviate the regulatory burdens for users who
utilize such approaches as part of their practices.  Examples of such
factors may include:  (1) emission reduction based on high barrier film
use; (2) influence of soil moisture levels; and (3) influence of organic
matter on emissions.  The goal of this session is to begin to summarize
available research on this issue, use this research to identify the
critical factors that should be considered related to emissions
reduction, and to begin to define factors for these parameters.

Questions:

Individual factors that impact fumigant emissions from treated fields
such as soil characterization, depth/type of delivery system, moisture
levels, soil temperature, and soil surface laminar air flows can be
generally referred to as first-principles factors.  What are the most
important first-principles factors which impact emissions from treated
fields?  Are they independent or do they impact emission rates in a
synergistic manner?  How much impact do regional and cultural practice
differences have on these results?

Can first-principles parameters be manipulated by producers, in a
typical commercial production system, to reduce emissions yet still
retain an effective, economically viable production system?  If so, what
techniques can be used to manipulate field conditions (e.g., high
barrier films, irrigation, soil adjuvants)?

Do data exist that can be used to demonstrate, in a reliable manner,
responses to questions 1 and 2?

Modeling approaches have been suggested as a means for using laboratory,
micro-field, and field-scale data for predicting emissions under varied
field conditions based on changes in first-principle parameters.  One
such suggested system is Chain 2D that was developed by USDA (
HYPERLINK "http://www.ars.usda.gov/Services/docs.htm?docid=8914"
http://www.ars.usda.gov/Services/docs.htm?docid=8914 ).  What data are
required for the reliable use of such models?  Do other viable model
options exist that can be used to predict emission rates based on
first-principles parameters?

The intent of this session is to provide a public forum where research
and initiatives related to the above goal and questions are presented.
EPA is not asking participants for recommendations to make regulatory
decisions.

Slides for this and other MBAO conference sessions can be viewed at
HYPERLINK "http://mbao.org/"  http://mbao.org/

	Wednesday, October 31, 2007	3:45 – 5:30 pm

EPA Determination of Field-Scale Soil Fumigant Emission Profiles
Moderator

	Jeff Dawson/

Charles Smith

3:45 - 3:55 pm	EPA Overview: Jeff Dawson/Charles Smith

3:55 - 4:30 pm	Research Panel Presentations: David Sullivan, Richard
Reiss,  Randy Segawa, Stanley Culpepper

4:30 - 5:30 pm	Open Discussion

Goal: The U.S. EPA is currently evaluating the potential risks
associated with the pre-plant uses of a variety of soil fumigant
chemicals. In its effort to develop risk management decisions for these
materials, it has become increasingly clear that quantitative data of
sufficient quality would allow for a more rigorous determination of
emission profiles that would be expected due to regional differences in
major fumigant use areas of the country as well as the cultural
practices employed in those regions to produce major crops.  Given the
regulatory challenges that exist, the development of emission profiles
which better reflect modern cultural practices and conditions are
required.  It is envisioned that such measurements can be used to
potentially alleviate the regulatory burdens for users who use practices
that are intended to reduce emissions.  Examples of such factors may
include:  (1) high barrier film use; (2) regions with higher percent
organic matter in their soils; and (3) cooler climates.  The goal of
this session is to begin to summarize available research on field-scale
emissions, use this research to identify the critical factors that
should be considered related to how emissions vary from region to region
based on chemicals used and cultural practices, and to begin to define
factors for these parameters including approaches for more economical,
yet reliable, monitoring methods.

Questions:

Fumigant emissions from treated agricultural fields can be impacted by
many factors and understanding how they vary for different cultural
systems is critical.  This is important both for the mitigation
strategies that might be employed for individual chemicals or within
limits defined by a cultural system or geographic region.  It follows
that there is a desire to obtain as much field-scale emissions data as
possible in order to evaluate trends in the data and also to be able to
provide more definitive risk estimates for the wide ranges of cultural
practices in use in agriculture today.  In an effort to solicit this
information, the Agency seeks any additional emissions data that may not
have been considered in our current process.  Do additional data exist?
What cultural systems were evaluated?  Are they representative of
current cultural practice and for what crops?

What are the most viable techniques for determining emission profiles
(e.g., indirect or aerodynamic flux)?  Are these techniques
systematically biased with regard to the results provided?

Is it possible to capture the necessary information to develop emission
profiles from field-scale treatments in a manner that is less expensive
and complex than the currently available monitoring methods?  If so,
what are these techniques?  What are the attributes of each and are they
inherently biased to the more commonly used methods?

Do data exist that can be used to demonstrate, in a reliable manner,
responses to question 3?

The intent of this session is to provide a public forum where research
and initiatives related to the above goal and questions are presented.
EPA is not asking participants for recommendations to make regulatory
decisions.

Slides for this and other MBAO conference sessions can be viewed at
HYPERLINK "http://mbao.org/"  http://mbao.org/


Wednesday,

June 19, 2002 Part VI Environmental Protection Agency 40 CFR Part 180 Pesticide Tolerance Nomenclature Changes; Technical Amendment; Final Rule VerDate May< 23> 2002 10: 51 Jun 18, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\ FR\ FM\ 19JNR2. SGM pfrm17 PsN: 19JNR2 41802 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2002 / Rules and Regulations ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 180 [ OPP   2002   0043; FRL   6835   2]

Pesticide Tolerance Nomenclature Changes; Technical Amendment AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). ACTION: Final rule; technical amendment.

SUMMARY: This document makes minor revisions to the terminology of certain commodity terms listed under 40 CFR part 180, subpart C. EPA is taking this action to establish a uniform listing of the commodity terms. DATES: This document is effective June 19, 2002.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By mail: Hoyt L. Jamerson, Registration Division ( 7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: ( 703) 308   9368; and e mail address: jamerson. hoyt@ epa. gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

You may be affected by this action if you are an agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer. Potentially affected categories and entities may include, but are not limited to:

Categories NAICS codes Examples of potentially affected entities Industry 111 Crop production 112 Animal production 311 Food manufacturing 32532 Pesticide manufacturing This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this action. Other types of entities not listed in the table could also be affected. The North American Industrial Classification System ( NAICS) codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining whether or not this action might apply to certain entities. If you have questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. B. How Can I Get Additional Information, Including Copies of this Document and Other Related Documents? 1. Electronically. You may obtain electronic copies of this document, and certain other related documents that might be available electronically, from the EPA Internet Home Page at http:// www. epa. gov/. To access this document, on the Home Page select `` Laws and Regulations,'' `` Regulations and Proposed Rules,'' and then look up the entry for this document under the `` Federal Register   Environmental Documents.'' You can also go directly to the Federal Register listings at http:// www. epa. gov/ fedrgstr/. A frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR part 180 is available at http:// www. access. gpo. gov/ nara/ cfr/ cfrhtml_ 180/ Title_ 40/ 40cfr180_ 00. html, a beta site currently under development. To access an electronic copy of the commodity data base entitled Food and Feed Commodity Vocabulary go to: http:// www. epa. gov/ pesticides/ foodfeed/. 2. In person. The Agency has established an official record for this action under docket control number OPP   2002   0043. The official record consists of the documents specifically referenced in this action, and other information related to this action, including any information claimed as Confidential Business Information ( CBI). This official record includes the documents that are physically located in the docket, as well as the documents that are referenced in those documents. The public version of the official record does not include any information claimed as CBI. The public version of the official record, which includes printed, paper versions of any electronic comments submitted during an applicable comment period is available for inspection in the Public Information and Records Integrity Branch ( PIRIB), Rm. 119, Crystal Mall # 2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA, from 8: 30 a. m. to 4 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The PIRIB telephone number is ( 703) 305   5805.

II. Background A. What Does this Technical Amendment Do? EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs ( OPP) has developed a commodity vocabulary data base entitled Food and Feed Commodity Vocabulary. The data base was developed to consolidate all the major OPP commodity vocabularies into one standardized vocabulary. As a result, all future pesticide tolerances issued under 40 CFR part 180 will use the `` preferred commodity term'' as listed in the aforementioned data base. This final rule is the first in a series of documents revising the terminology of commodity terms listed under 40 CFR part 180. This revision process will establish a uniform presentation of existing commodity terms under 40 CFR part 180. In this rule, EPA is making the following format changes to the terminology of commodity terms in 40 CFR part 180 to the extent the terminology is not already in this format: 1. The first letter of the commodity term is capitalized. All other letters, including the first letter of proper names, are changed to lower case. 2. Commodity terms are listed in the singular although there are the following exceptions: including the terms `` leaves'', `` roots'', `` tops'', `` greens'', `` hulls'', `` vines'', `` fractions'', `` shoots'', and `` byproducts''. 3. Hyphens are removed from commodity terms. Example  `` Cattle, meat by products'' is revised to read `` Cattle, meat byproducts''. 4. Commodity terms are amended so that generic terms, such as `` corn'', `` pea'', `` cattle'', precede modifying terms, such as `` field'', `` dry'', `` summer''. Examples  `` Corn, field''; `` Pea, dry''; and `` Squash, summer'', not `` field corn'', `` dry pea'', or `` Summer squash''. 5. Abbreviated terms are replaced with the appropriate commodity terms. Examples  `` Hog MBYP'' is replaced with `` hog, meat byproducts''. K+ CWHR is replaced with `` kernal plus cob with husks removed''. 6. Parenthesis are replaced with commas. Example  `` Cattle meat byproducts ( except kidney)'' is replaced with `` Cattle, meat byproducts, except kidney''. 7. Combined commodity entries are listed separately. Examples  `` Goat, kidney and liver'' is revised to read as follows: `` Goat, kidney'', and `` Goat, liver''. `` Fat of cattle, goat, horse and sheep'' is revised to read as follows: `` Cattle, fat'', `` Goat, fat'', `` Horse, fat;'', `` Sheep, fat'' 8. Crop group terms are revised to standardize with the `` Food and Feed Vocabulary''. Examples: i. `` Stonefruit group'' is revised to read `` Fruit, stone, group''. ii. `` Cucurbit Vegetables Crop Group'' is revised to read `` Vegetable, cucurbit, group''. iii. `` Brassica ( cole) leafy vegetables'' is revised to read `` Vegetable, brassica leafy, group''.

VerDate jun< 06> 2002 19: 38 Jun 18, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 19JNR2. SGM pfrm15 PsN: 19JNR2 41803 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2002 / Rules and Regulations B. Why is this Technical Amendment Issued as a Final Rule?

Section 553 of the Administrative Procedure Act ( APA), 5 U. S. C. 553( b)( B), provides that, when an agency for good cause finds that notice and public procedure are impracticable, unnecessary or contrary to the public interest, the agency may issue a rule without providing notice and an opportunity for public comment. EPA has determined that there is good cause for making today's technical amendment final without prior proposal and opportunity for comment, because today's action revises commodity terms listed under 40 CFR part 180, subpart C, in a manner that clearly will have no impact on the meaning of the tolerance regulations. For example, today's action revises commodity terms so that most are in singular ( e. g., `` peach'') instead of the plural ( e. g., `` peaches''). A complete description of the types of changes that are being made has been provided above. EPA has determined that there is no need to public comment on such ministerial changes and thus that there is good cause under 5 U. S. C. 553( b)( B) for dispensing with public comment. While EPA believes that it has correctly identified all instances where these above listed revisions need to be made, the Agency would appreciate readers notifying EPA of discrepancies, omissions, or technical problems by submitting them to the address or e mail under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. These will be corrected in a future rule.

III. Regulatory Assessment Requirements This final rule implements technical amendments to the Code of Federal Regulations which have no substantive impact on the underlying regulations, and it does not otherwise impose or amend any requirements. As such, the Office of Management and Budget ( OMB) has determined that a technical amendment is not a `` significant regulatory action'' subject to review by OMB 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 due to its lack of significance, this rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use ( 66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). 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., or 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). 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); or OMB review or any Agency action under Executive Order 13045, entitled Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks ( 62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). 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). Since the action does 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. In addition, the Agency has determined that this action will not have a substantial direct effect on 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, as specified in Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism ( 64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure `` meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' `` Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations that have `` substantial direct effects 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.'' This action does not alter the relationships or distribution of power and responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions of FFDCA section 408( n)( 4). For these same reasons, the Agency has determined that this rule does not have any `` tribal implications'' as described in Executive Order 13175, entitled Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments ( 65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000). Executive Order 13175, requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure `` meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications.'' `` Policies that have tribal implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations that have `` substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal government and the Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal government and Indian tribes.'' This rule will not have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, 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, as specified in Executive Order 13175. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule.

IV. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General The Congressional Review Act, 5 U. S. C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 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: June 11, 2002. Marcia Mulkey, Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.

Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180   [ AMENDED]

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

Authority: 21 U. S. C. 321( q), 346( a) and 374.

Subpart C   [ Amended]

2. In the following table, change the term exactly as it appears in the `` Existing Term'' column to read like the term in the `` New Term'' column VerDate jun< 06> 2002 20: 15 Jun 18, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 19JNR2. SGM pfrm15 PsN: 19JNR2 41804 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2002 / Rules and Regulations wherever it may appear in subpart C, and realphabetize the new term where appropriate:

Existing Term New Term Alfalfa ( forage) Alfalfa, forage Alfalfa hay Alfalfa, hay Alfalfa ( hay) Alfalfa, hay Almond hull Almond, hulls Almond hulls Almond, hulls Almonds hulls Almond, hulls Almonds Almond Apples Apple Apple pomace, wet Apple, wet pomace Apple, pomace, wet Apple, wet pomace Apple pomace ( wet) Apple, wet pomace Apricots ( dried) Apricot, dried Apricots Apricot Artichokes Artichoke Avocados Avocado Bamboo shoots Bamboo, shoots Banana ( Pulp) Banana, pulp Barley ( straw) Barley, straw Barley, pearled Barley, pearled barley Bananas Banana Beans Bean Beets Beet Blackberries Blackberry Blueberries Blueberry Boysenberries Boysenberry Brazil nut Nut, brazil Bulb vegetables Vegetable, bulb, group Butternuts Butternut ( CA only) , CA only Canola meal Canola, meal Canola seed Canola, seed Cantaloupes Cantaloupe Cereal grains Grain, cereal Citrus citron Citron, citrus Existing Term New Term Citrus fruit Fruit, citrus Citrus molasses Citrus, molasses Citrus oil Citrus, oil Clover ( forage) Clover, forage Clover hay Clover, hay Clover ( hay) Clover, hay Clover, hay, for seed Clover, hay, grown for seed Cottonseed, hulls Cotton, hulls Cottonseed hulls Cotton, hulls Cottonseed soapstock Cotton, seed, soapstock Cottonseed meal Cotton, meal Cottonseed, meal Cotton, meal Cottonseed meals Cotton, meal Cottonseed, meals Cotton, meal Cottonseed, refined oil Cotton, refined oil Cranberries Cranberry Cucumbers Cucumber Currants Currant Dewberries Dewberry Eggs Egg Eggplants Eggplant ( exc. kidney and liver) , except kidney and liver ( exc. kidney, liver) , except kidney and liver ( exc. kidney) , except kidney ( exc kidney, liver) , except kidney and liver ( except kidney, liver) , except kidney and liver ( except kidney and liver) , except kidney and liver except kidney and liver , except kidney and liver ; except kidney and liver , except kidney and liver ( except kidney) , except kidney except kidney , except kidney ( except liver) , except liver Existing Term New Term except liver , except liver ( exc. liver) , except liver ( except liver and kidney) , except kidney and liver Field corn, forage Corn, field, forage Field corn, grain Corn, field, grain Field corn, stover Corn, field, stover Field, corn, forage Corn, field, forage Field, corn, grain Corn, field, grain Forage grasses Grass, forage Forage legumes Legume, forage Fruiting vegetables Vegetable, fruiting Flax straw Flax, straw ( fresh) , fresh ( fresh prune) , prune, fresh ( fresh, prunes) prune, fresh Fruits Fruit Goats Goat Grapes Grape Grasses Grass Grain crop Grain, crop Grain crops Grain, crop Grain, crops Grain, crop Gooseberries Gooseberry Grape juice Grape, juice Grape, raisins Grape, raisin Grapefruits Grapefruit Guavas Guava Hickory nuts Nut, hickory Honeydew melons Melon, honeydew Honeydews Melon, honeydew Hop cones, dried Hop, dried cone Hogs Hog Hops Hop Hop, dried Hop, dried cones Horses Horse ( hulls) , hulls Lemons Lemon VerDate May< 23> 2002 10: 51 Jun 18, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 19JNR2. SGM pfrm17 PsN: 19JNR2 41805 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2002 / Rules and Regulations Existing Term New Term Leeks Leek Legumes, forage Legume, forage Limes Lime Loganberries Loganberry Mangoes Mango Melons Melon meat by product meat byproducts meat byproduct meat byproducts meat by products meat byproducts ( mbyp) , meat byproducts mbyp meat byproducts Mbyp meat byproducts Mushrooms Mushroom Nectarines Nectarine Nuts Nut Olives Olive Onions ( dry bulb) Onion, dry bulb Onion, dry Onion, dry bulb Onions, bulb Onion, dry bulb Onions, green Onion, green Onions Onion Existing Term New Term Peaches Peach Pears Pear Peas Pea Peppers ( bell) Pepper, bell Peppers, non bell Pepper, nonbell Peppers Pepper Peppermint tops Peppermint, tops Persimmons Persimmon Pimentos Pimento Pineapple fodder Pineapple, fodder Pineapple forage Pineapple, forage Pistachios Pistachio Pomegranates Pomegranate ( POST H) , postharvest ( post h) , postharvest Potato chips Potato, chips Potatoes Potato Pumpkins Pumpkin Raspberries Raspberry ( seed) , seed ( seed treatment) , seed treatment Existing Term New Term Strawberries Strawberry Rice bran Rice, bran Rice grain Rice, grain Rice hulls Rice, hulls Rice polishings Rice, polished rice Rice straw Rice, straw Sainfoin hay Sanfoin, hay Salsify tops Salsify, tops Spearmint tops Spearmint, tops Summer squash Squash, summer Tangerines Tangerine Tomatoes Tomato Walnuts Walnut Watermelons Watermelon Youngberries Youngberry 3. In the following table change the term exactly as it appears in the `` Existing Term'' column to read like the term in the `` New Term'' column wherever it appears in subpart C, and realphabetize the new term where appropriate:

Existing Term New Term Alfalfa, hay, for seed Alfalfa, hay, grown for seed Animal feed, nongrass group ( except alfalfa) Animal feed, nongrass, group, except alfalfa Bean ( succulent form) Bean, succulent Bean, snap ( succulent form) Bean, snap, succulent Brassica ( cole) leafy vegetables Vegetable, brassica, leafy, group Brassica ( cole) leafy vegetables group Vegetable, brassica, leafy, group Brassica, head and stem, subgroup, excluding cabbage Brassica, head and stem, subgroup, except cabbage Brassica, head and stem subgroup ( 5 A) Brassica, head and stem, subgroup Brassica, head and stem, crop subgroup 5 A Brassica, head and stem, subgroup Brassica, head and stem subgroup Brassica, head and stem, subgroup Brassica, head and stem Brassica, head and stem, subgroup Cereal Grains ( excluding sweet corn), Bran Grain, cereal, bran, except sweet corn Cereal Grains ( excluding sweet corn), Forage Grain, cereal, forage, except sweet corn Cereal Grains ( excluding sweet corn), Grain Grain, cereal, grain, except sweet corn Cereal Grains ( excluding sweet corn), Hay Grain, cereal, hay, except sweet corn VerDate May< 23> 2002 10: 51 Jun 18, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 19JNR2. SGM pfrm17 PsN: 19JNR2 41806 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2002 / Rules and Regulations Existing Term New Term Cereal Grains ( excluding sweet corn), Hulls Grain, cereal, hulls, except sweet corn Cereal Grains ( excluding sweet corn), Stover Grain, cereal, stover, except sweet corn Cucurbit vegetable group Vegetable, cucurbit, group Cucurbit Vegetables Crop Group Vegetable, cucurbit, group Cucurbit vegetables group Vegetable, cucurbit, group Cucurbits vegetable group Vegetable, cucurbit, group Cucurbit vegetables Vegetable, cucurbit, group Cucurbits vegetables Vegetable, cucurbit, group Citrus pulp, dehydrated Citrus, dried pulp ( K= CWHR) , kernel plus cob with husks removed ( K= kwhr) , kernel plus cob with husks removed ( K+ CWHR) , kernel plus cob with husks removed ( K + CWHR) , kernel plus cob with husks removed , K + CWHR , kernel plus cob with husks removed ( kernel plus cob with husks removed) , kernel plus cob with husks removed Oregano, Mexican, leaves Oregano, mexican, leaves Pepper, ( non bell1) Pepper, nonbell1 Potato waste from processing Potato, processed potato waste Root and tuber vegetables Vegetable, root and tuber, group Root and tuber vegetables group Vegetable, root and tuber, group Stone fruit crop group Fruit, stone, group Stone fruit Fruit, stone Stone fruits ( Crop Group 12) Fruit, stone, group Stone fruits group Fruit, stone, group Stonefruit group Fruit, stone, group Stone Fruits Fruit, stone Stone fruit crop group ( except plums and prunes) Fruit, stone, group, except plum and fresh prune plum Stone fruit, except plum, prune, fresh Fruit, stone, except fresh prune plum 4. In § 180.183, paragraph ( a)( 2)( ii) is revised to read as follows:

§ 180.183 O, O Diethyl S[ 2( ethylthio) ethyl] phosphorodithioate; tolerances for residues.

( a) * * * ( 2) * * * ( ii) 5 parts per million in pineapple, bran when present therein as a result of the application of the insecticide in the production of pineapple. * * * * * 5. Section 180.236 is amended by deleting from the table the entries for `` Cattle, goats, hogs, horses and sheep, kidney and liver'' and by alphabetically inserting the following entries:

§ 180.236 Triphenyltin hydroxide; tolerances for residues.

* * * * *

Commodity Parts per million Cattle, kidney ............................ 0.05 Cattle, liver ................................ 0.05 Goat, kidney ............................. 0.05 Goat, liver ................................. 0.05 Hog, kidney ............................... 0.05 Hog, liver .................................. 0.05 Horse, kidney ............................ 0.05 Commodity Parts per million Horse, liver ............................... 0.05 * * * * * Sheep, kidney ........................... 0.05 Sheep, liver' .............................. 0.05 * * * * *

§ § 180.110, 180.163, and 180.379 [ Amended]

6. Sections 180.110( a), 180.163( a), and 180.379( a)( 1) are amended by changing the term `` Winter squash'' to read `` Squash, winter'' and realphabetizing VerDate May< 23> 2002 10: 51 Jun 18, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 19JNR2. SGM pfrm17 PsN: 19JNR2 41807 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2002 / Rules and Regulations the new term and entry where appropriate. 7. In § 180.303, the table to pararaph ( a)( 1) is amended by changing the term `` Winter Squash'' to read `` Squash, winter'' by realphabetizing the new term, and by revising paragraph ( a)( 2) to read as follows:

§ 180.303 Oxamyl; tolerances for residues.

( a) * * * ( 2) A tolerance of 6 parts per million is established for residues of the insecticide oxamyl ( methyl N, Ndimethyl N[( methylcarbamoyl) oxy] 1 thiooxamimidate) in pineapple, bran as a result of application of the insecticide to growing pineapple. * * * * *

§ 180.414 [ Amended]

8. The table § 180.414( a)( 1) are amended by changing and term `` Lima beans'' to read `` Bean, lima'' and by realphabetizing the new term and entry where appropriate. 9. In § 180.409( a)( 1) amend the table by removing the entries `` Cattle, kidney and liver''; `` Goats, kidney and liver''; `` Hogs, kidney and liver''; `` Horses, kidney and liver''; and `` Sheep, kidney and liver'' and by adding alphabetically the following entries to the table:

§ 180.409 Pirimiphos methyl; tolerances for residues.

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

Commodity Parts per million * * * * * Cattle, kidney ............................ 2.0 Cattle, liver ................................ 2.0 * * * * * Goat, kidney ............................. 2.0 Goat, liver ................................. 2.0 * * * * * Hog, kidney ............................... 2.0 Hog, liver .................................. 2.0 * * * * * Horse, kidney ............................ 2.0 Horse, liver ............................... 2.0 * * * * * Sheep, kidney ........................... 2.0 Sheep, liver' .............................. 2.0 * * * * *

10. The table to § 180.410( a) is amended by removing the entry for `` Apple pomace ( wet and dry)'' and by adding alphabetically entries for `` Apple, dry pomace'' and `` Apple, wet pomace'' as follows:

§ 180.410 Triademifon; tolerances for residues.

( a) * * * Commodity Parts per million * * * * * Apple, dry pomace ................... 4.0 Apple, wet pomace ................... 4.0 * * * * *

* * * * * 11. The table to § 180.412( a) is amended by removing the entry for `` Apple pomace, wet and dry'' and by adding alphabetically entries for `` Apple, dry pomace'' and `` Apple, wet pomace'' to read as follows:

§ 180.412 Sethoxydim; tolerances for residues. ( a)* * *

Commodity Parts per million Expiration/ Revocation Date * * * * *. Apple, dry pomace 0.8 None Apple, wet pomace 0.8 None * * * * *

* * * * * 12. In § 180.421 the table to paragraph ( a)( 1) is amended by removing the entry for `` Apple pomace ( wet and dry)'' and by adding alphabetically entries for `` Apple, dry pomace'' and `` Apple, wet pomace'' to read as follows:

§ 180.421 Fenarimol; tolerances for residues. ( a) * * * ( 1) * * *

Commodity Parts per million * * * * * Apple, dry pomace ................... 2.0 Apple, wet pomace ................... 2.0 * * * * *

* * * * * 13. In § 180.423 amend the table by removing the entries `` Cattle, kidney and liver''; `` Goat, kidney and liver''; `` Hog, kidney and liver''; `` Horse, kidney and liver''; and `` Sheep, kidney and liver'' and by adding alphabetically new entries as follows:

§ 180.423 Fenridazon; potassium salt; tolerances for residues.

* * * * *

Commodity Parts per million * * * * * Cattle, kidney ............................ 1.0 Cattle, liver ................................ 1.0 * * * * * Goat, kidney ............................. 1.0 Goat, liver ................................. 1.0 * * * * * Hog, kidney ............................... 1.0 Commodity Parts per million Hog, liver .................................. 1.0 * * * * * Horse, kidney ............................ 1.0 Horse, liver ............................... 1.0 * * * * * Sheep, kidney ........................... 1.0 Sheep, liver' .............................. 1.0 * * * * *

14. Section 180.443( a) is amended by removing from the table the entry for `` Apple pomace ( wet and dry)'', by adding alphabetically an entry for `` Apple, dry pomace'' and by revising the entry for `` Apple, wet pomace'' to read as follows:

§ 180.443 Myclobutanil; tolerances for residues.

( a) * * *

Commodity Parts per million * * * * * Apple, dry pomace ................... 5.0 Apple, wet pomace ................... 5.0 * * * * *

* * * * * 15. Section 180.564 is amended by removing from the table in paragraph ( a) the entries for `` Cattle, goat, horse, sheep and hog fat''; `` Cattle, goat, horse, sheep and hog meat''; and `` Cattle, goat, horse, sheep and hog meat byproducts''; and by adding the following entries alphabetically to the table:

§ 180.564 Indoxacarb; tolerances for residues.

( a) * * *

Commodity Parts per million * * * * * Cattle, fat .................................. 0.75 Cattle, meat .............................. 0.03 Cattle, meat byproducts ........... 0.02 * * * * * Goat, fat .................................... 0.75 Goat, meat ................................ 0.03 Goat, meat byproducts ............. 0.02 Hog, fat ..................................... 0.75 Hog, meat ................................. 0.03 Hog, meat byproducts .............. 0.02 Horse, fat .................................. 0.75 Horse, meat .............................. 0.03 Horse, meat byproducts ........... 0.02 * * * * * Sheep, fat ................................. 0.75 Sheep, meat ............................. 0.03 Sheep, meat byproducts .......... 0.02 * * * * *

§ § 180.455,180.518 and 180.566 [ Amended]

16. Sections 180.455, and 180.518( e) are amended by changing the term for VerDate jun< 06> 2002 19: 38 Jun 18, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 19JNR2. SGM pfrm15 PsN: 19JNR2 41808 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2002 / Rules and Regulations `` Wine grapes'' in the table to both sections to read `` Grape, wine'' and in the table to § 180.566( a) is amended by changing the term `` Wine grapes1'' to read `` Grape, wine1'', and by realphabetizing the new term.

[ FR Doc. 02   15332 Filed 6   18   02; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   S VerDate May< 23> 2002 10: 51 Jun 18, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 19JNR2. SGM pfrm17 PsN: 19JNR2