[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 41 (Monday, March 2, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 12285]
[FR Doc No: 2020-04211]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-0040; FRL-10004-58]

Pesticide Experimental Use Permit; Receipt of Application;
Comment Request

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces EPA's receipt of application 89850-EUP-R
from SemiosBio Technologies, Inc., requesting an experimental use
permit (EUP) for lavandulyl senecioate. EPA has determined that the
permit may be of regional or national significance. Therefore, because
of the potential significance, EPA is seeking comments on this
application.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 1, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-0721, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert McNally, Biopesticides and
Pollution Prevention Division (7511P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington,
DC 20460-0001; main telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action is directed to the public in general. Although this
action may be of particular interest to those persons who conduct or
sponsor research on pesticides, EPA has not attempted to describe all
the specific entities that may be affected by this action.

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

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When preparing and submitting
your comments, see the commenting tips at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html.
    3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to achieve environmental
justice, the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of any group,
including minority and/or low income populations, in the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies. To help address potential environmental justice issues, EPA
seeks information on any groups or segments of the population who, as a
result of their location, cultural practices, or other factors, may
have atypical or disproportionately high and adverse human health
impacts or environmental effects from exposure to the pesticide
discussed in this document, compared to the general population.

II. What action is the Agency taking?

    Under section 5 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), 7 U.S.C. 136c, EPA can allow manufacturers to
field test pesticides under development. Manufacturers are required to
obtain an EUP before testing new pesticides or new uses of pesticides
if they conduct experimental field tests on more than 10 acres of land
or more than one surface acre of water.
    Pursuant to 40 CFR 172.11(a), EPA has determined that the following
EUP application may be of regional or national significance, and
therefore is seeking public comment on the EUP application:
    Submitter: SemiosBio Technologies, Inc., 101-887 Great Northern
Way, Vancouver, BC V5T 4T5, Canada, (c/o Killoren Regulatory
Consulting, LLC, 316 Highland Ave., Hartford, WI 53027).
    Pesticide Chemical: Lavandulyl senecioate.
    Summary of Request: SemiosBio Technologies, Inc. submitted a
request for an EUP to dispense a pheromone via an end-use product (EP)
(Semios VMB Eco DS) containing 23.54% lavandulyl senecioate as the
active ingredient in order to disrupt the mating cycle of vine
mealybug. The EP is proposed to be used from March 1, 2020, through
November 31, 2021, across 740 acres of grapes in the state of
California. The total amount of EP and active ingredient to be used
during the EUP is 530 pounds and 131 pounds, respectively. Major
objectives of the EUP include the following: (1) Optimizing dispensing
window, i.e., how many hours during the day and which hours; (2)
optimizing dispensing intervals, i.e., how many actuations per minute;
and (3) comparing efficacy against commercial products and/or grower
standards. A tolerance exemption already exists for the active
ingredient as long as the pheromone does not exceed 150 grams of active
ingredient per acre; a tolerance exemption petition has not been
submitted with this EUP application because the applicant believes the
aforementioned limitation will not be exceeded with the proposed
testing.
    Following the review of the application and any comments and data
received in response to this solicitation, EPA will decide whether to
issue or deny the EUP request, and if issued, the conditions under
which it is to be conducted. Any issuance of an EUP will be announced
in the Federal Register.

(Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.)

    Dated: January 24, 2020.
Delores Barber,
Director, Information Technology and Resources Management Division,
Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. 2020-04211 Filed 2-28-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 153 (Friday, August 8, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 46498]
[FR Doc No: 2014-18914]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

File No. 500-1

In the Matter of Amico Games Corp., Andina Group Inc., Cougar Oil
& Gas Canada Inc., Encorium Group, Inc., and Waccamaw Bankshares, Inc.,
Order of Suspension of Trading

August 6, 2014.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Amico Games Corp. because it has not filed any periodic reports since
the period ended May 31, 2011.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Andina Group Inc. because it has not filed any periodic reports since
the period ended March 31, 2011.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Cougar Oil & Gas Canada Inc. because it has not filed any periodic
reports since the period ended December 31, 2010.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Encorium Group, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic reports
since the period ended December 31, 2010.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Waccamaw Bankshares, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic reports
since the period ended December 31, 2010.
    The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the
protection of investors require a suspension of trading in the
securities of the above-listed companies.
    Therefore, it is ordered, pursuant to Section 12(k) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that trading in the securities of the
above-listed companies is suspended for the period from 9:30 a.m. EDT
on August 6, 2014, through 11:59 p.m. EDT on August 19, 2014.

    By the Commission.
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-18914 Filed 8-6-14; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 207 (Thursday, October 27, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65052-65053]
[FR Doc No: 2022-23412]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2634-092]

Great Lakes Hydro America, LLC; Notice of Application Accepted
for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection.
    a. Type of Application: Request for a temporary amendment of
reservoir elevation and minimum required flow releases.
    b. Project No.: 2634-092.
    c. Dates Filed: July 14 and September 22, 2022.
    d. Applicant: Great Lakes Hydro America, LLC.
    e. Name of Project: Storage Project.
    f. Location: The project is located on the South and West branches
of the Penobscot River and its tributaries in

Somerset and Piscataquis counties, Maine.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Mr. Kevin Bernier, Great Lakes Hydro America,
LLC, 1024 Central Street, Millinocket ME, 04462,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Mr. Steven Sachs,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].
    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and protests
is 30 days from the issuance of this notice by the Commission. The
Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file comments,
motions to intervene, and protests using the Commission's eFiling
system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can
submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior
registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/doc-sfiling/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact
information at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact
FERC Online Support at [email protected],<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll
free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, you may
submit a paper copy. Submissions sent via the U.S. Postal Service must
be addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street NE, Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426.
Submissions sent via any other carrier must be addressed to: Kimberly
D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins
Avenue, Rockville, MD 20852. The first page of any filing should
include docket number P-2634-092.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all
intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of
that document on each person on the official service list for the
project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the
Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the
responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve
a copy of the document on that resource agency.
    k. Description of Request: The applicant requests a temporary
amendment of its normal water level management and flow release
requirements at the Ragged Lake development of its Storage Project.
Rather than maintaining as high a water level as possible through July
15 and gradually drawing down the reservoir until winter, the applicant
is maintaining Ragged Lake at an elevation of approximately 1,115.5
feet U.S. Geological Survey datum or 19.5 feet below the full pond
elevation at the dam beginning on April 27, 2022. Furthermore, instead
of drawing on reservoir storage to provide for elevated required flow
releases through the summer and early autumn, the applicant is
maintaining run-of-river operation, in which outflow is equal to
inflow. The applicant states the temporary amendment is necessary to
alleviate dam safety concerns and expects to continue the modified
operation until the winter of 2022-2023.
    l. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://ferc.gov) using the
``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. For
assistance, contact FERC at [email protected] or call toll-
free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Motions To Intervene, or Protests: Anyone may submit
comments, a motion to intervene, or a protest in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission
will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who
file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules
may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, motions to
intervene, or protests must be received on or before the specified
comment date for the particular application.
    o. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: Any filing must (1)
bear in all capital letters the title ``COMMENTS'', ``MOTION TO
INTERVENE'', or ``PROTEST'' as applicable; (2) set forth in the heading
the name of the applicant and the project number(s) of the application
to which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and
telephone number of the person intervening or protesting; and (4)
otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through
385.2005. All comments, motions to intervene, or protests must set
forth their evidentiary basis. A copy of all other filings in reference
to this application must be accompanied by proof of service on all
persons listed in the service list prepared by the Commission in this
proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 385.2010.

    Dated: October 21, 2022.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-23412 Filed 10-26-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: September 23, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 185)]
[Notices]
[Page 54888-54890]
[DOCID:fr23se08-138]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2008-0231]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of final disposition.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to exempt 23 individuals from the
vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations
(FMCSRs). The exemptions will enable these individuals to operate
commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) in interstate commerce without meeting
the prescribed vision standard. The Agency has concluded that granting
these exemptions will provide a level of safety that is equivalent to,
or greater than, the level of safety maintained without the exemptions
for these CMV drivers.

DATES: The exemptions are effective September 23, 2008. The exemptions
expire on September 23, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Mary D. Gunnels, Director, Medical
Programs,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA, Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Room W64-224, Washington,
DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Electronic Access

    You may see all the comments online through the Federal Document
Management System (FDMS) at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The FDMS is available 24 hours each day, 365
days each year. If you want

acknowledgment that we received your comments, please include a self-
addressed, stamped envelope or postcard or print the acknowledgement
page that appears after submitting comments on-line.
    Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19476). This information is
also available at http://Docketsinfo.dot.gov.

Background

    On August 12, 2008, FMCSA published a notice of receipt of
exemption applications from certain individuals, and requested comments
from the public (73 FR 46973). That notice listed 23 applicants' case
histories. The 23 individuals applied for exemptions from the vision
requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), for drivers who operate CMVs in
interstate commerce.
    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption
for a 2-year period if it finds ``such exemption would likely achieve a
level of safety that is equivalent to, or greater than, the level that
would be achieved absent such exemption.'' The statute also allows the
Agency to renew exemptions at the end of the 2-year period.
Accordingly, FMCSA has evaluated the 23 applications on their merits
and made a determination to grant exemptions to all of them. The
comment period closed on September 11, 2008.

Vision and Driving Experience of the Applicants

    The vision requirement in the FMCSRs provides:
    A person is physically qualified to drive a commercial motor
vehicle if that person has distant visual acuity of at least 20/40
(Snellen) in each eye without corrective lenses or visual acuity
separately corrected to 20/40 (Snellen) or better with corrective
lenses, distant binocular acuity of at least 20/40 (Snellen) in both
eyes with or without corrective lenses, field of vision of at least
70[deg] in the horizontal meridian in each eye, and the ability to
recognize the colors of traffic signals and devices showing standard
red, green, and amber (49 CFR 391.41(b)(10)).
    FMCSA recognizes that some drivers do not meet the vision standard,
but have adapted their driving to accommodate their vision limitation
and demonstrated their ability to drive safely.
    The 23 exemption applicants listed in this notice are in this
category. They are unable to meet the vision standard in one eye for
various reasons, including amblyopia, prosthesis, aphakia, macular
scar, corneal scarring, hyperopia, exotropia, and loss of vision due to
trauma. In most cases, their eye conditions were not recently
developed. All but six of the applicants were either born with their
vision impairments or have had them since childhood. The six
individuals who sustained their vision conditions as adults have had
them for periods ranging from 4 to 15 years.
    Although each applicant has one eye which does not meet the vision
standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), each has at least 20/40 corrected
vision in the other eye, and in a doctor's opinion, has sufficient
vision to perform all the tasks necessary to operate a CMV. Doctors'
opinions are supported by the applicants' possession of valid
commercial driver's licenses (CDLs) or non-CDLs to operate CMVs. Before
issuing CDLs, States subject drivers to knowledge and skills tests
designed to evaluate their qualifications to operate a CMV. All these
applicants satisfied the testing standards for their State of
residence. By meeting State licensing requirements, the applicants
demonstrated their ability to operate a commercial vehicle, with their
limited vision, to the satisfaction of the State.
    While possessing a valid CDL or non-CDL, these 23 drivers have been
authorized to drive a CMV in intrastate commerce, even though their
vision disqualified them from driving in interstate commerce. They have
driven CMVs with their limited vision for careers ranging from 4 to 43
years. In the past 3 years, two of the drivers had convictions for
traffic violations and four of them were involved in crashes.
    The qualifications, experience, and medical condition of each
applicant were stated and discussed in detail in the August 12, 2008
notice (73 FR 46973).

Basis for Exemption Determination

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption
from the vision standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) if the exemption is
likely to achieve an equivalent or greater level of safety than would
be achieved without the exemption. Without the exemption, applicants
will continue to be restricted to intrastate driving. With the
exemption, applicants can drive in interstate commerce. Thus, our
analysis focuses on whether an equal or greater level of safety is
likely to be achieved by permitting each of these drivers to drive in
interstate commerce as opposed to restricting him or her to driving in
intrastate commerce.
    To evaluate the effect of these exemptions on safety, FMCSA
considered not only the medical reports about the applicants' vision,
but also their driving records and experience with the vision
deficiency. To qualify for an exemption from the vision standard, FMCSA
requires a person to present verifiable evidence that he/she has driven
a commercial vehicle safely with the vision deficiency for the past 3
years. Recent driving performance is especially important in evaluating
future safety, according to several research studies designed to
correlate past and future driving performance. Results of these studies
support the principle that the best predictor of future performance by
a driver is his/her past record of crashes and traffic violations.
Copies of the studies may be found at docket number FMCSA-98-3637.
    We believe we can properly apply the principle to monocular
drivers, because data from the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA)
former waiver study program clearly demonstrate the driving performance
of experienced monocular drivers in the program is better than that of
all CMV drivers collectively. (See 61 FR 13338, 13345, March 26, 1996).
The fact that experienced monocular drivers demonstrated safe driving
records in the waiver program supports a conclusion that other
monocular drivers, meeting the same qualifying conditions as those
required by the waiver program, are also likely to have adapted to
their vision deficiency and will continue to operate safely.
    The first major research correlating past and future performance
was done in England by Greenwood and Yule in 1920. Subsequent studies,
building on that model, concluded that crash rates for the same
individual exposed to certain risks for two different time periods vary
only slightly. (See Bates and Neyman, University of California
Publications in Statistics, April 1952.) Other studies demonstrated
theories of predicting crash proneness from crash history coupled with
other factors. These factors--such as age, sex, geographic location,
mileage driven and conviction history--are used every day by insurance
companies and motor vehicle bureaus to predict the probability of an
individual experiencing future crashes. (See Weber, Donald C.,
``Accident Rate Potential: An Application of Multiple Regression
Analysis of a Poisson Process,'' Journal

of American Statistical Association, June 1971). A 1964 California
Driver Record Study prepared by the California Department of Motor
Vehicles concluded that the best overall crash predictor for both
concurrent and nonconcurrent events is the number of single
convictions. This study used 3 consecutive years of data, comparing the
experiences of drivers in the first 2 years with their experiences in
the final year.
    Applying principles from these studies to the past 3-year record of
the 23 applicants, two of the applicants had a traffic violation for
speeding, one of the applicants had a traffic violation for failure
unsafe lane changes, one of the applicants had a traffic violation for
following another vehicle too closely, and four of the applicants were
involved in crashes. The applicants achieved this record of safety
while driving with their vision impairment, demonstrating the
likelihood that they have adapted their driving skills to accommodate
their condition. As the applicants' ample driving histories with their
vision deficiencies are good predictors of future performance, FMCSA
concludes their ability to drive safely can be projected into the
future.
    We believe the applicants' intrastate driving experience and
history provide an adequate basis for predicting their ability to drive
safely in interstate commerce. Intrastate driving, like interstate
operations, involves substantial driving on highways on the interstate
system and on other roads built to interstate standards. Moreover,
driving in congested urban areas exposes the driver to more pedestrian
and vehicular traffic than exists on interstate highways. Faster
reaction to traffic and traffic signals is generally required because
distances between them are more compact. These conditions tax visual
capacity and driver response just as intensely as interstate driving
conditions. The veteran drivers in this proceeding have operated CMVs
safely under those conditions for at least 3 years, most for much
longer. Their experience and driving records lead us to believe that
each applicant is capable of operating in interstate commerce as safely
as he/she has been performing in intrastate commerce. Consequently,
FMCSA finds that exempting these applicants from the vision standard in
49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) is likely to achieve a level of safety equal to
that existing without the exemption. For this reason, the Agency is
granting the exemptions for the 2-year period allowed by 49 U.S.C.
31136(e) and 31315 to 67 of the 23 applicants listed in the notice of
August 12, 2008 (73 FR 46973).
    We recognize that the vision of an applicant may change and affect
his/her ability to operate a CMV as safely as in the past. As a
condition of the exemption, therefore, FMCSA will impose requirements
on the 23 individuals consistent with the grandfathering provisions
applied to drivers who participated in the Agency's vision waiver
program.
    Those requirements are found at 49 CFR 391.64(b) and include the
following: (1) That each individual be physically examined every year
(a) by an ophthalmologist or optometrist who attests that the vision in
the better eye continues to meet the standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10),
and (b) by a medical examiner who attests that the individual is
otherwise physically qualified under 49 CFR 391.41; (2) that each
individual provide a copy of the ophthalmologist's or optometrist's
report to the medical examiner at the time of the annual medical
examination; and (3) that each individual provide a copy of the annual
medical certification to the employer for retention in the driver's
qualification file, or keep a copy in his/her driver's qualification
file if he/she is self-employed. The driver must also have a copy of
the certification when driving, for presentation to a duly authorized
Federal, State, or local enforcement official.

Discussion of Comments

    FMCSA received one comment in this proceeding. The comment was
considered and discussed below.
    Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety (Advocates) expressed
opposition to FMCSA's policy to grant exemptions from the FMCSRs,
including the driver qualification standards. Specifically, Advocates:
(1) objects to the manner in which FMCSA presents driver information to
the public and makes safety determinations; (2) objects to the Agency's
reliance on conclusions drawn from the vision waiver program; (3)
claims the Agency has misinterpreted statutory language on the granting
of exemptions (49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315); and finally (4) suggests
that a 1999 Supreme Court decision affects the legal validity of vision
exemptions.
    The issues raised by Advocates were addressed at length in 64 FR
51568 (September 23, 1999), 64 FR 66962 (November 30, 1999), 64 FR
69586 (December 13, 1999), 65 FR 159 (January 3, 2000), 65 FR 57230
(September 21, 2000), and 66 FR 13825 (March 7, 2001). We will not
address these points again here, but refer interested parties to those
earlier discussions.

Conclusion

    Based upon its evaluation of the 23 exemption applications, FMCSA
exempts, William C. Ball, Terrence L. Benning, Rickie L. Boone, Robert
S. Bowen, Dennis R. Buszkiewicz, Larry T. Byrley, Robert J. Clarke,
Eldon D. Cochran, Alfred A. Constantino, James R. Corley, Larry D.
Curry, Brian F. Denning, Michael W. Dillard, Kelly M. Greene, Sammy K.
Hines, John H. Holmberg, Gary R. Lomen, Leonardo Lopez, Jr., Jeffrey F.
Meier, James G. Mitchell, Billy R. Pierce, James A. Rapp, and Thomas P.
Shank from the vision requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), subject to
the requirements cited above (49 CFR 391.64(b)).
    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each exemption
will be valid for 2 years unless revoked earlier by FMCSA. The
exemption will be revoked if: (1) The person fails to comply with the
terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted
in a lower level of safety than was maintained before it was granted;
or (3) continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the
goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136 and 31315.
    If the exemption is still effective at the end of the 2-year
period, the person may apply to FMCSA for a renewal under procedures in
effect at that time.

    Issued on: September 17, 2008.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy and Program Development.
[FR Doc. E8-22226 Filed 9-22-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


Significant New Alternatives Policy Program

Fire Extinguishing and Explosion Prevention Sector

Risk Screen on Substitutes for Halon 1211 in Portable Fire Extinguishers

Substitute: Firebane® 1170 and Firebane® 1179

This risk screen does not contain Clean Air Act (CAA) Confidential
Business Information (CBI) and, therefore, may be disclosed to the
public.

Introduction

Ozone-depleting substances (ODS) are being phased out of production in
response to a series of diplomatic and legislative efforts that have
taken place over the past two decades, including the Montreal Protocol
and the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAAA).  The U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), as authorized by Section 612 of the CAAA,
administers the Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) Program,
which identifies acceptable and unacceptable substitutes for ODS in
specific end-uses based on assessment of their health and environmental
impacts.

EPA’s decision on the acceptability of a substitute is based largely
on the findings of a screening assessment of potential human health and
environmental risks posed by the substitute in specific applications.
EPA has already screened a large number of substitutes in many end-use
applications within all of the major ODS-using sectors, including
refrigeration and air conditioning, solvent cleaning, foam blowing,
aerosols, fire suppression, adhesives, coatings and inks, and
sterilization. The results of these risk screens are presented in a
series of Background Documents that are available in EPA's docket.

The purpose of this risk screen is to supplement EPA’s Background
Document on the fire suppression and explosion protection sector (EPA
1994) (hereinafter referred to as the Background Document). This risk
screen discusses the potential human health and environmental risks
posed by Firebane® 1170 or Firebane® 1179 when used as a streaming
agent in portable fire extinguishers as a replacement for Halon 1211.
The reader is referred to the Background Document for the methodologies
and assumptions used to conduct this risk screen. Table 1 presents the
composition of the proposed substitutes.

Table   SEQ Table \* ARABIC  1 : Composition of Firebane® 1170 and
Firebane® 1179

Constituent	Chemical Formulaa	CAS No.	Formulation (by Weight Percent)

	Firebane® 1170	Firebane® 1179

a N/A = not available.

Because the formulations of Firebane® 1170 and Firebane® 1179 are very
similar and share the same human health and environmental risks, the
remaining sections of this risk screen address both  Firebane® 1170 and
Firebane® 1179  (hereinafter collectively referred to as “both
Firebane formulations”).

Section 2 of this risk screen summarizes the results of the risk screen
for the proposed substitutes listed in Table 1.  The remainder of the
risk screen is organized into the following sections:

Section 3: Atmospheric Assessment;

Section 4: Occupational Exposure Assessment;

Section 5: End-Use Exposure Assessment;

Section 6: General Population Exposure Assessment;

Section 7: Volatile Organic Compound Assessment; and

Section 8: References.

Summary of Results

Both formulations of Firebane® are recommended for SNAP approval as
streaming agents in portable fire extinguishers.  However, adequate
ventilation should be in place, appropriate personal protective
equipment (PPE) should be worn, and proper training administered for the
manufacture, use, and disposal of this product. PPE should include
safety goggles and protective gloves. Additionally, the risk screen
indicates that the use of the proposed substitutes will be less harmful
to the atmosphere than the continued use of Halon 1211.  Risk to the
general population is expected to be negligible provided that proper
disposal procedures are used, and occupational exposure should not pose
a problem if PPE is used. For applications of this and all other
portable fire extinguishers, ICF recommends that the latest edition of
National Fire Protection Agency (NFPA) Standard 10 be followed.

Atmospheric Assessment

This section presents an assessment of the potential risks to
atmospheric integrity posed by the use of both Firebane® formulations
as streaming agents.  According to the submitter, both Firebane®
formulations contain no Class I or Class II ODS, nor any compounds with
measured global warming potential (GWP). Therefore, the use of
Firebane® 1170 and Firebane® 1179 will be less damaging to the
atmosphere than continued use of Halon 1211.

Occupational Exposure Assessment

The potential for personnel exposure during manufacture, installation,
and maintenance are examined in this section.  The discharge scenarios
discussed are assumed to occur accidentally and not as the result of a
fire.  In order to evaluate occupational exposure, ICF has evaluated the
active compounds contained in both Firebane® formulations.  The common
application types, FDA approval status, and associated hazards for these
compounds are presented in   REF _Ref291689835 \h  \* MERGEFORMAT  Table
2 .

Table   SEQ Table \* ARABIC  2 : Common Applications Types and FDA
Approval Status of Firebane® 1170 and Firebane® 1179 Constituents

Constituent	Common Application Types	FDA Approval Statusa,b,c	Associated
Hazards

a FDA = U.S. Food and Drug Administration

b FDA approvals are subject to use restrictions. Please see the cited
regulation for further information.

c GRAS = Generally Recognized as Safe

Occupational Exposure during Manufacture

Both formulations of Firebane® are not expected to pose a risk to
workers during manufacture. Based on the information provided in the
SNAP submission, occupational exposures during manufacture of both
Firebane® formulations are expected to be limited to mixing of the
chemicals and filling of extinguishers. As summarized in the table
above, all the constituents exhibit low toxicity and are commonly used
in food applications. In addition, exposure to either of the Firebane®
formulations is expected to be in the liquid form, with any vapor or gas
exposures considered to be negligible (GSL 2011c and GSL 2010). The risk
of exposure will be further minimized by following safety and
precautionary measures. For measures designed to minimize the hazards
associated with a specific constituent, as noted in Table 2, the
constituent’s MSDS should be referenced. In order to minimize the risk
associated with all of the constituents of either Firebane®
formulation, EPA recommends the following in accordance with general
procedures prescribed in the MSDS of the proposed substitutes and by the
submitter:

Proper Level D or higher PPE be used during handling of the substitute
(e.g., goggles, gloves);

Adequate ventilation should be in place;

All spills should be cleaned up immediately in accordance with good
industrial hygiene practices; and

Training for safe handling procedures should be provided to all
employees that would be likely to handle containers of or extinguishing
units filled with Firebane® 1170 or Firebane® 1179.

Because of the minimal chance of worker exposure to the chemicals during
the manufacturing process, the use of exposure controls and adherence to
the appropriate occupational safety guidelines as mentioned above, are
sufficient to ensure that the manufacture of both formulations of
Firebane® does not pose a risk to human health. In addition, an
automated system for charging the extinguishers, as proposed by the
submitter, would further reduce the risk of occupational exposure during
manufacture to both formulations of Firebane® (GSL 2011a and 2011b).

Occupational Exposure during Installation and Maintenance

Both Firebane® formulations are not expected to pose a significant risk
to personnel during installation and maintenance activities. During the
installation or maintenance of either of the Firebane® formulations,
inadvertent discharge may occur.  Oxygen displacement during discharge
of either Firebane® formulation is considered to be negligible, and
therefore not a concern during inadvertent discharge (GSL 2011a and GSL
2011b). In addition, as noted above, all the constituents exhibit low
toxicity and are commonly used in food applications.  To ensure that the
potential for exposure during installation and maintenance are further
minimized, it is recommended that all personnel involved in the
installation and maintenance of either of the Firebane® formulations
adhere to safety guidelines, as mentioned previously in Section   REF
_Ref292194109 \r \h  \* MERGEFORMAT  4.1 .  It is recommended that the
safe handling training also focus on the prevention of an inadvertent
discharge.  In case of an inadvertent discharge, workers should
immediately follow the instructions listed in the MSDS for Firebane®
1170 or Firebane® 1179.

End-Use Exposure Assessment

Both formulations of Firebane® are not expected to pose significant
risk to end-users when used as streaming agents in portable fire
extinguishers. The primary health concern for both Firebane®
formulations at the end-use is exposure to the post-activation discharge
products. Both formulations of Firebane® are stored as aqueous
solutions that become gases upon introduction to fire (GSL 2011c and GSL
2010).  Inhalation of the Firebane® 1170 or Firebane® 1179 gas vapors
may cause mild irritation to the upper respiratory track; chronic
ingestion will cause gastrointestinal irritation; and eye exposure may
cause mild irritation (GSL 2011c and GSL 2010). In case of exposure,
individuals should follow the instructions prescribed in the proposed
substitutes’ MSDS. To minimize risk of exposure and irritation, EPA
recommends that individuals follow the precautionary measures described
in Section   REF _Ref292194109 \r \h  \* MERGEFORMAT  4.1 .

General Population Exposure Assessment

This section screens potential risks to the general population from
exposure to ambient air releases of both Firebane® formulations and its
constituents.  Firebane® 1170 and Firebane® 1179 are not expected to
cause a significant threat to human health in the general population
when used as streaming agents in portable fire extinguishers. The only
consumer exposure to either Firebane® formulation will be during
discharge of fire extinguishers in occupied spaces.  Firefighters and
other end-users exposed to either Firebane® formulation during release
should wear appropriate PPE, including goggles and gloves.  Individuals
should follow the precautionary measures described in the proposed
substitutes’ MSDS and Section 4.1 of this risk screen.  When the
recommended safety precautions are followed, no significant adverse
health effects are expected.

6.1. 	Ambient Air

Firebane® 1170 and Firebane® 1179 are not expected to pose a
significant threat to human health in the general population in ambient
air concentrations. As noted previously, both Firebane® formulations
are composed entirely of compounds that are FDA-approved for use in
food, of which some are also FDA-classified as GRAS. Therefore, both
Firebane® formulations are not expected to be a safety concern for
ambient air contamination.

6.2.  	Surface Water

Both Firebane® formulations are not expected to pose a significant
threat to human health or the environment, provided that proper disposal
procedures are followed. As discussed in the Background Document, the
physicochemical properties of the majority of halon substitutes make it
unlikely that the substitutes would be released to surface water as a
result of use. In the case of both Firebane® formulations, it is
expected that all of the constituents would rapidly aerosolize during
expulsion from the container and then settle as a liquid film on
surfaces (as opposed to becoming airborne and settling on a nearby
stream). After settling, cleanup would involve washing/rinsing of
surfaces. Because of the high biological oxygen demand (BOD) associated
with each Firebane® formulation, it is recommended that discharges of
either Firebane® formulation not be released to waterways. Further, it
is recommended that during cleanup, discharges of both Firebane®
formulations be collected (e.g., mopped) and contained in sealed
containers and then disposed of in accordance with local, state, and
federal requirements.  Training for safe disposal procedures should also
be provided to all employees that would be likely to dispose of either
Firebane® formulation at cleanup. In addition, the use of an
extinguisher is expected to be infrequent (i.e., in case of a fire
emergency), and therefore discharges would be infrequent—with proper
procedures for cleanup in place, there is a very limited cause for
concern.  Therefore, EPA believes that when the recommended disposal
procedures are followed, both Firebane® formulations do not pose a
significant threat to human health or the environment during end-use or
at cleanup.

Discharges of either Firebane® formulation at manufacture to publicly
owned treatment works (POTWs) are subject to local, state, and federal
restrictions. Such restrictions include a limit on the BOD levels of
industrial wastewater. EPA believes that regulatory requirements on
discharges that result from manufacture are sufficient to control human
health and environmental risks associated with the manufacturing
operations of both Firebane® formulations.

6.3. 	Solid Waste

No constituents of Firebane® 1179 are considered to be hazardous waste
under EPA regulations implementing the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act.  During post-activation cleanup procedures, cleanup
residues should be disposed of in accordance with requirements
appropriate for those materials.

Volatile Organic Compound Analysis

Of the constituents of both Firebane® formulations, only propylene
glycol has not been exempted as a volatile organic compound (VOC) under
the CAA (40 CFR 51.000). However, some states also have regulations
concerning exempted VOCs and the definition of a VOC, which could
exclude propylene glycol from consideration as a VOC. In general, VOC
emissions should be sufficiently controlled through regulations and
standard industry practices. VOC emissions from the production of
portable extinguishers charged with Firebane® 1170 or Firebane® 1179
are controlled through standard industry practices, and as such,
emissions from manufacture of units are likely to be minimal.  Using
release estimates from the Vintaging Model, the annual release rate
(including discharge, leak, and training release rates) for portable
extinguishers was calculated to be approximately 3.5% of extinguisher
charge size.  Assuming this release rate, an assessment was performed to
compare the annual VOC emissions from use of Firebane® 1170 and
Firebane® All-Weather 1179 in portable extinguishers produced in one
year to other anthropogenic sources of VOC emissions.  Assuming the
submitter’s current production plans, the amount of VOCs that would be
emitted would be approximately equal to 1.5x10-5 percent of the annual
VOC emissions caused by fires, or only about 5.6x10-7 percent of all
annual anthropogenic VOC emissions.   Moreover, even if all of the
Firebane® 1170 and Firebane® 1179 produced by Global Safety Labs in
one year were to be released to the atmosphere over the course of the
year (extremely unlikely), the resulting annual VOC emissions would be
approximately 4.4x10-4 percent of annual VOC emissions caused by fires,
or only about 1.6x10-5 percent of all annual anthropogenic VOC
emissions. As these emissions of Firebane® are several orders of
magnitude less than other anthropogenic emissions, the environmental
impacts of these VOCs are not considered a threat.

References

EPA 1994. "Risk Screen on the Use of Substitutes for Class I
Ozone-depleting Substances:  Fire Extinguishing and Protection (Halon
Substitutes)," U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, March 1994.

EPA 2008. 2005 National Emissions Inventory Data & Documentation.
Inventory Data: 42 Category Summaries. Last updated 6 July 2010.
Accessed 20 September 11. Available online at
<http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/net/2005inventory.html#inventorydata>.

EPA 2009.  National Emissions Inventory (NEI) Air Pollutant Emissions
Trends Data and Estimation Procedures.1970 – 2008 Average Annual
Emissions, All Criteria Pollutants.  Last updated 09 June 2009. Accessed
20 September 11. Available online at
<http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/trends/index.html#tables>.

EPA 2011. The National Emissions Inventory. 2008 National Inventory
Data. Last updated 19 July 11. Accessed 20 September 11. Available
online at <http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/net/2008inventory.html>.

Global Safety Labs, Inc. 2011a. “Response to Incomplete SNAP
Submission for Firebane® 1170.” April 4, 2011.

Global Safety Labs, Inc. 2011b. “Response to Incomplete SNAP
Submission for Firebane® 1179.” April 4, 2011.

Global Safety Labs, Inc. 2011c.  SNAP Submission to EPA for Firebane®
1170.  February 7, 2011.

Global Safety Labs, Inc. 2010.  SNAP Submission to EPA for Firebane®
1179.  December 23, 2010.

NFPA. 2010.  NFPA 10: Standard for Portable Fire Extinguishers.  2010
Edition.  Available at
<http://www.nfpa.org/catalog/product.asp?pid=1010&order%5Fsrc=B484>

 BOD is the amount of oxygen consumed by microorganisms as they
decompose organic materials in water.

 POTWs establish BOD limits in order to prevent overloading of the water
treatment system, which could potentially cause the organism-based
treatment system to fail if oxygen levels become too low for aerobic
respiration.

 The total annual release rate of 3.5% for portable extinguishers was
determined using the average annual leak rate (2%), annual discharge
rate (1.5%), and annual release during training (0%) from the Vintaging
Model (v4.4_3.23.11).

 Based on 2010 projections calculated using 2008 EPA annual VOC
emissions data for residential wood burning and agricultural field
burning (EPA 2008 and EPA 2011) and ICF assumptions.

 Based on 2010 projections calculated using 2008 EPA annual VOC
emissions data (EPA 2009) and ICF assumptions.

  DATE \@ "MMMM d, yyyy"  September 27, 2011

 PAGE  1


[Federal Register: February 18, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 32)]
[Notices]
[Page 7297]
[DOCID:fr18fe10-65]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the
Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, that the Securities
and Exchange Commission will hold a Closed Meeting on Thursday,
February 18, 2010 at 2 p.m.
    Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners, the Secretary to the
Commission, and recording secretaries will attend the Closed Meeting.
Certain staff members who have an interest in the matters also may be
present.
    The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has
certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth
in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (5), (7), 9(B) and (10) and 17 CFR
200.402(a)(3), (5), (7), 9(ii) and (10), permit consideration of the
scheduled matters at the Closed Meeting.
    Commissioner Walter, as duty officer, voted to consider the items
listed for the Closed Meeting in a closed session, and determined that
no earlier notice thereof was possible.
    The subject matter of the Closed Meeting scheduled for Thursday,
February 18, 2010 will be:

Institution and settlement of injunctive actions;
Institution and settlement of administrative proceedings;
An adjudicatory matter;
Amicus consideration; and
Other matters relating to enforcement proceedings.
    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in
the scheduling of meeting items.
    For further information and to ascertain what, if any, matters have
been added, deleted or postponed, please contact:
    The Office of the Secretary at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: February 12, 2010.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-3138 Filed 2-16-10; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 36 (Monday, February 24, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10196-10197]
[FR Doc No: 2014-03867]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2007-0039]

Intertek Testing Services NA, Inc.: Request for Renewal of
Recognition

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In this notice, OSHA announces the Intertek Testing Services
NA, Inc. (ITSNA), application containing a request for renewal of
recognition as a Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL) under
29 CFR 1910.7.

DATES: Submit comments, information, and documents in response to this
notice, or requests for an extension of time to make a submission, on
or before March 11, 2014.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments by any of the following methods:
    1. Electronically: Submit comments and attachments electronically
at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal eRulemaking Portal.
Follow the instructions online for making electronic submissions.
    2. Facsimile: If submissions, including attachments, are not longer
than 10 pages, commenters may fax them to the OSHA Docket Office at
(202) 693-1648.
    3. Regular or express mail, hand delivery, or messenger (courier)
service: Submit a copy of comments and any attachments to the OSHA
Docket Office, Docket No. OSHA-2007-0039, Technical Data Center, U.S.
Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Room N-2625,
Washington, DC 20210; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER> (TDY number: (877) 889-
5627). Note that security procedures may result in significant delays
in receiving comments and other written materials by regular mail.
Contact the OSHA Docket Office for information about security
procedures concerning delivery of materials by express delivery, hand
delivery, or messenger service. The hours of operation for the OSHA
Docket Office are 8:15 a.m.-4:45 p.m., e.t.
    4. Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency name and
the OSHA docket number (OSHA-2007-0039). OSHA will place all
submissions, including any personal information provided, in the public
docket without revision, and these submissions will be available online
at http://www.regulations.gov.
    5. Docket: To read or download submissions or other material in the
docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov or the OSHA Docket Office at
the address above. All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index; however, some information (e.g.,
copyrighted material) is not publicly available to read or download
through the Web site. All submissions, including copyrighted material,
are available for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office.
Contact the OSHA Docket Office for assistance in locating docket
submissions.
    6. Extension of comment period: Submit requests for an extension of
the comment period on or before March 11, 2014 to the Office of
Technical Programs and Coordination Activities, Directorate of
Technical Support and Emergency Management, Occupational Safety and
Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution
Avenue NW., Room N-3655, Washington, DC 20210, or by fax to (202) 693-
1644.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David W. Johnson, Director, Office of
Technical Programs and Coordination Activities, Directorate of
Technical Support and Emergency Management, Occupational Safety and
Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution
Avenue NW., Room N-3655, Washington, DC 20210, phone<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    OSHA recognition of an NRTL signifies that the organization meets
the requirements in Section 1910.7 of Title 29, Code of Federal
Regulations (29 CFR 1910.7). Recognition is an acknowledgment that the
organization can perform independent safety testing and certification
of the specific products covered within its scope of recognition and is
not a delegation or grant of government authority. As a result of

recognition, employers may use products properly approved by the NRTL
to meet OSHA standards that require testing and certification. OSHA
maintains an informational Web site for each NRTL that details its
scope of recognition available at http://www.osha.gov/dts/otpca/nrtl/index.html.
    The Agency processes applications by an NRTL for renewal of
recognition following requirements in Appendix A to 29 CFR 1910.7. OSHA
conducts renewals in accordance with the procedures in 29 CFR 1910.7,
App. II.C. In accordance with these procedures, NRTLs submit a renewal
request to OSHA, not less than nine months or no more than one year,
before the expiration date of its current recognition. A renewal
request includes a request for renewal and any additional information
the NRTL wishes to submit to demonstrate its continued compliance with
the terms of its recognition and 29 CFR 1910.7. If OSHA has not
conducted an on-site assessment of the NRTL's headquarters and key
sites within the past 18 to 24 months, it will schedule the necessary
on-site assessments prior to the expiration date of the NRTL's
recognition. Upon review of the submitted material and, as necessary,
the successful completion of the on-site assessment, OSHA announces its
preliminary decision to grant or deny renewal in the Federal Register
and solicit comments from the public. OSHA then publishes a final
Federal Register notice responding to any comments and renewing the
NRTL's recognition for a period of five years, or denying the renewal
of recognition.
    ITSNA initially received OSHA recognition as an NRTL on September
13, 1989 (54 FR 37845). ITSNA's most recent renewal was on May 29,
2001, for a five-year period, expiring on May 29, 2006. ITSNA submitted
a timely request for renewal, dated August 25, 2005 (see Ex. OSHA-2007-
0039-0011), and retains its recognition pending OSHA's final decision
in this renewal process. The current addresses of ITSNA facilities
recognized by OSHA and included as part of the renewal request are:

1. ITSNA Cortland, 3933 U.S. Route 11, Cortland, New York 13045;
2. ITSNA Atlanta, 1950 Evergreen Boulevard, Duluth, Georgia 30096;
3. ITSNA Boxborough, 70 Codman Hill Road, Boxborough, Massachusetts
01719;
4. ITSNA Lexington, 731 Enterprise Drive, Lexington, Kentucky 40510;
5. ITSNA San Francisco, 1365 Adams Court, Menlo Park, California 94025;
6. ITSNA Los Angeles, 25791 Commercentre Drive, Lake Forest, California
92630;
7. ITSNA Minneapolis, 7250 Hudson Boulevard, Suite 100, Oakdale,
Minnesota 55128;
8. ITSNA Madison, 8431 Murphy Drive, Middleton, Wisconsin 53562;
9. ITSNA SEMKO, Box 1103, S-164 22, Kista, Stockholm, Sweden;
10. ITSNA Chicago, 545 East Algonquin Road, Suite F, Arlington Heights,
Illinois 60005;
11. ITSNA Hong Kong, 2/F., Garment Centre, 576 Castle Peak Road,
Kowloon, Hong Kong;
12. ITSNA Vancouver, 1500 Brigantine Drive, Coquitlam, British
Columbia, Canada V3K 7C1;
13. ITSNA Fairfield, 41 Plymouth Street, Fairfield New Jersey 07004;
and
14. ITSNA Dallas, 1809 10th Street, Suite 400, Plano, Texas 75074.

II. Notice of Preliminary Findings

    OSHA is providing notice that ITSNA is applying for renewal of its
current recognition as a NRTL. This renewal covers ITSNA's existing
NRTL scope of recognition. OSHA evaluated ITSNA's application for
renewal and preliminarily determined that ITSNA can continue to meet
the requirements prescribed by 29 CFR 1910.7 for recognition.
Accordingly, OSHA is making a determination that it does not need to
conduct an on-site review of ITSNA's facilities based on its
evaluations of ITSNA's application and all other available information.
This information includes OSHA's most recent audit of ITSNA's
headquarters, ITSNA Cortland, on June 20-22, 2012, in which the
auditors found some non-conformances with the requirements of 29 CFR
1910.7. ITSNA addressed these issues sufficiently to meet the
applicable NRTL requirements.
    OSHA also performed audits of the ITSNA Cortland site on August 25-
27, 2009 and June 18-19, 2008; of the ITSNA Atlanta site on March 12-
13, 2008; of the ITSNA Boxborough site on March 21-22, 2013; of the
ITSNA San Francisco site on April 23-24, 2012; of the ITSNA Hong Kong
site on August 19-21, 2013; of the ITSNA Vancouver site on October 16-
17, 2008; and of the ITSNA Dallas site on March 1-2, 2013. The auditors
found some non-conformances with the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.7.
ITSNA addressed these issues sufficiently to meet the applicable NRTL
requirements. This preliminary finding does not constitute an interim
or temporary approval of the application.
    OSHA welcomes public comment as to whether ITSNA meets the
requirements of 29 CFR 1910.7 for renewal of their recognition as an
NRTL. Comments should consist of pertinent written documents and
exhibits. Commenters needing more time to comment must submit a request
in writing, stating the reasons for the request. OSHA must receive the
written request for an extension by the due date for comments. OSHA
will limit any extension to 30 days unless the requester justifies a
longer period. OSHA may deny a request for an extension if it is not
adequately justified. To obtain or review copies of the publicly
available information in ITSNA's application and other pertinent
documents (including exhibits), as well as all submitted comments,
contact the Docket Office, Room N-2625, Occupational Safety and Health
Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, at the above address; these
materials also are available online at http://www.regulations.gov under
Docket No. OSHA-2007-0039.
    OSHA staff will review all comments to the docket submitted in a
timely manner and, after addressing the issues raised by these
comments, will recommend whether to grant ITSNA's application for
renewal. The Assistant Secretary will make the final decision on
granting the application and, in making this decision, may undertake
other proceedings prescribed in Appendix A to 29 CFR 1910.7. OSHA will
publish a public notice of this final decision in the Federal Register.

III. Authority and Signature

    David Michaels, Ph.D., MPH, Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, 200 Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20210, authorized the preparation of this notice.
Accordingly, the Agency is issuing this notice pursuant to 29 U.S.C.
657(g)(2), Secretary of Labor's Order No. 1-2012 (77 FR 3912, Jan. 25,
2012), and 29 CFR 1910.7.

    Signed at Washington, DC, on February 19, 2014.
David Michaels,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2014-03867 Filed 2-21-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 170 (Wednesday, September 2, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53213-53216]
[FR Doc No: 2015-21672]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-75766; File No. SR-BOX-2015-22]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BOX Options Exchange LLC; Order
Granting Approval of a Proposed Rule Change To Implement the Governance
Provisions of an Equity Rights Program

August 27, 2015.

I. Introduction

    On June 25, 2015, BOX Options Exchange LLC (the ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant
to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to
implement the governance provisions of a volume performance rights
program (the ``VPR Program''). The proposed rule change was published
for comment in the Federal Register on July 13, 2015.\3\ The Commission
received no comments on the proposal. This order approves the proposed
rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75374 (July 7,
2015), 80 FR 40100 (SR-BOX-2015-22) (``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description

    Under the VPR Program, BOX \4\ Options Participants \5\
(``Participants'') that take part in the Program will have the right to
acquire equity in, and receive distributions from, BOX Holdings Group
LLC (``Holdings''), an affiliate of the Exchange and direct parent
entity of BOX, in exchange for a nominal cash payment and the
achievement of certain order flow volume commitments over a period of
five years.\6\ Pursuant to the VPR Program, Volume Performance Rights
(``VPRs'') were issued to Participants that elected to participate, met
the eligibility criteria and made the initial cash payment
(``Subscribers'').\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ ``BOX'' means BOX Market LLC, an options trading facility of
the Exchange. See BOX Rule 100(a)(7).
    \5\ ``Options Participant'' or ``Participant'' means a firm, or
organization that is registered with the Exchange pursuant to the
Rule 2000 Series for purposes of participating in options trading on
BOX as an ``Order Flow Provider'' or ``Market Maker.'' See BOX Rule
100(a)(40).
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74114 (January 22,
2015), 80 FR 4611 (January 28, 2015) (SR-BOX-2015-03) (the ``VPR
Filing''). See also Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74171
(January 29, 2015), 80 FR 6153 (February 4, 2015) (SR-BOX-2015-05)
(extending the deadline to participate in the VPR program until
January 14, 2015) (the ``Second VPR Filing'').
    \7\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 40101. The VPRs were issued in
tranches of twenty (20) VPRs (each, a ``Tranche'') with a minimum
subscription of two (2) Tranches per Subscriber. According to the
Exchange, twenty-seven (27) Tranches have been issued in connection
with the VPR Program. See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Each VPR is comprised of the right to receive 8.5 unvested new
Class C Membership Units of Holdings (``Class C Units''), upon
effectiveness of this proposed rule change. One VPR per Tranche will be
eligible to vest each quarter of the five (5) year Program period,
subject to the Subscriber meeting its volume commitment for that
quarter. In addition, VPRs may be reallocated among Subscribers based
upon exceeding or failing to meet Subscribers' volume commitments
during the VPR Program period.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 40101.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Ownership Units

    As described in more detail in the Notice,\9\ in order to implement
certain aspects of the VPR Program, Holdings would amend its existing
Limited Liability Company Agreement (the ``Holdings LLC Agreement'') by
adopting an Amended and Restated Limited Liability Company Agreement of
Holdings (the ``Restated Holdings LLC Agreement''), to create Class C

Units.\10\ Once Class C Units are created, Holdings will admit the
Subscribers as Class C Members.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See id.
    \10\ See Notice, supra note 3 at, 40100. Currently, Holdings
only has issued and outstanding Class A and Class B membership
Units. See id. at 40101.
    \11\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The existing limitations on the percentage ownership of Holdings by
Participants will continue to apply. Specifically, in the event that a
Member, or any Related Person \12\ of a Member, is a Participant, and
the Member owns more than 20% of the Units,\13\ alone or together with
any Related Person of the Member (Units owned in excess of 20% being
referred to as ``Excess Units''), the Member and its designated
Directors \14\ will have no voting rights with respect to the Excess
Units on any action relating to Holdings nor will the Member or its
designated Directors, if any, be entitled to give any proxy with
respect to the Excess Units in relation to a vote of the Members;
provided, however, that whether or not the Member or its designated
Directors, if any, otherwise participates in a meeting in person or by
proxy, the Member's Excess Units will be counted for quorum purposes
and will be voted by the person presiding over quorum and vote matters
in the same proportion as the Units held by the other Members are voted
(including any abstentions from voting).\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The Exchange is not proposing to change the definition of
``Related Person.'' See Notice, supra note 3, at 40101, n.9.
    \13\ ``Units'' means Class A Membership Units, Class B
Membership Units and Class C Units of Holdings. See proposed
Restated Holdings LLC Agreement Section 1.1 (defining ``Units'').
    \14\ See proposed Restated Holdings LLC Agreement Section 4.1(a)
(defining ``Directors'').
    \15\ See proposed Restated Holdings LLC Agreement Section
7.4(h).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Upon completion of the VPR Program, all outstanding Class C Units
associated with vested VPRs will be automatically converted into an
equal number of Class A Units and all outstanding Class C Units
associated with unvested VPRs will be automatically cancelled and be of
no further effect. All rights related to Class C Units will terminate
automatically upon cancellation or conversion and rights related to the
converted Class A Units will remain, subject to the terms of the
Restated Holdings LLC Agreement.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See proposed Restated Holdings LLC Agreement Section
2.5(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Voting

    Each Class C Member will have the right to vote its Class C Units
that are associated with vested VPRs (``Voting Class C Units'') on
matters submitted to a vote of all holders of Units. VPRs will vest in
accordance with the vesting provisions of the VPR Program.\17\ Members
holding Voting Class C Units will vote with Members holding all other
classes of Units. Members holding Voting Units \18\ will be entitled to
vote together, as a single class, each with one vote per Voting Unit so
held.\19\ Issued and outstanding Class C Units that are not Voting
Class C Units will not have voting rights. According to the Exchange,
as a Subscriber meets or exceeds its volume commitments, its voting
powers as a Class C Member of Holdings will increase.\20\ Similarly, if
a Subscriber does not meet its volume commitment, its voting powers
will decrease.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Notice, supra note 3. See also VPR Filing, supra note
6.
    \18\ ``Voting Unit'' means any Class A Unit, Class B Unit, or
Voting Class C Unit. See proposed Restated Holdings LLC Agreement,
Section 1.1.
    \19\ See proposed Restated Holdings LLC Agreement Section
4.13(a).
    \20\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 40102.
    \21\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Holdings LLC Agreement currently provides, and the Restated
Holdings LLC Agreement will continue to provide, that any Director
designated by either MX US 2, Inc. or IB Exchange Corp may effectively
block certain actions of Holdings (the ``Major Action Veto''). Under
the Restated Holdings LLC Agreement, upon vesting of VPRs associated
with Class C Units equal to at least 25% of the total outstanding
Units, the Major Action Veto will automatically expire and be of no
further effect. In addition, when the 25% threshold is met, the
Restated Holdings LLC Agreement provides that Holdings and its Members
will take all necessary action to amend the Limited Liability Company
Agreement of BOX to eliminate the Major Action Veto provisions therein
that are applicable to BOX and inure to the benefit of MX US 2, Inc.
and IB Exchange Corp and to provide that the executive committee of BOX
will be constituted in the same manner as the Executive Committee of
Holdings.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See proposed Restated Holdings LLC Agreement Section 16.4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Restated Holdings LLC Agreement includes a new supermajority
voting requirement that Members holding at least 67% of all outstanding
Voting Units must vote to approve certain actions (the ``Supermajority
Actions'') by Holdings.\23\ The supermajority voting requirement,
however, would not apply to certain of these Supermajority Actions,\24\
to the extent otherwise required by the Exchange to fulfill its
regulatory functions or responsibilities or to oversee the BOX Market
as determined by the board of the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See proposed Restated Holdings LLC Agreement Section
4.13(b). For further details on these actions, see Notice, supra
note 3, at 40102-03.
    \24\ See, e.g., proposed Restated Holdings LLC Agreement Section
4.13(b)(vi)-(viii), (x), (xii), and (xiii). These provisions are:
(1) The issuance, by Holdings, of any additional equity interests
in, or any securities exchangeable for or convertible into equity
securities of, Holdings, subject to specified exceptions; (2) the
issuance, by BOX, of any additional equity interests in, or any
securities exchangeable for or convertible into equity securities
of, BOX, except as otherwise provided in the Facility Agreement; (3)
permitting BOX to operate the BOX Market utilizing any other
regulatory services provider other than the Exchange; (4) making a
fundamental change to the business model of BOX to be other than a
for-profit business; (5) altering the provisions relating to the
designation of Directors set forth in Restated Holdings LLC
Agreement; and (6) altering or amending any of the Supermajority
Actions provisions as set forth in the Restated Holdings LLC
Agreement. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Directors

    The Exchange proposes to amend the Holdings LLC Agreement with
respect to the composition of the Holdings Board. Currently, MX US 2,
Inc. has the right to designate up to five (5) Directors, IB Exchange
Corp has the right to designate up to two (2) Directors and each other
Member has the right to designate one (1) Director to the Holdings
Board and the Holdings Board has the power to increase the size of the
Holdings Board and to authorize new Members to designate Directors.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See Notice, supra 3, at 40103.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the Restated Holdings LLC Agreement, no Member may designate
more than three (3) Directors and each Member may designate the maximum
number of Directors permitted under any one (1) (but not more than one)
of the following criteria: (i) Each Member, so long as it (together
with its respective Affiliates) holds a combined total of Class A Units
and Class B Units greater than two and one-half percent (2.5%) of all
outstanding Voting Units, will be entitled to designate one (1)
Director, (ii) each Member, so long as it (together with its respective
Affiliates) holds a combined total of Voting Class C Units greater than
four percent (4%) of all outstanding Voting Units, will be entitled to
designate one (1) Director, (iii) each Member, so long as it (together
with its respective Affiliates) holds a combined total of Voting Units
greater than fourteen percent (14%) of all outstanding Voting Units,
will be entitled to designate two (2) Directors, (iv) each Member, so
long as it (together with its respective Affiliates) holds a combined
total of Voting Units greater than twenty-eight percent (28%) of all

outstanding Voting Units, will be entitled to designate three (3)
Directors, and (v) each other existing Member may designate one (1)
Director.\26\ Directors serving on the Holdings Board may also serve on
the board of directors of any subsidiary of Holdings. If a Member
ceases to qualify for the right to designate a Director then serving,
then that Director will then automatically be removed from the Holdings
Board.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See proposed Restated Holdings LLC Agreement Section
4.1(a)(i)-(vi).
    \27\ See proposed Restated Holdings LLC Agreement section
4.1(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Restated Holdings LLC Agreement also will amend the provisions
governing the right of Members to designate members of the Executive
Committee of Holdings (the ``Executive Committee''), if any.\28\
Currently, MX US 2, Inc. has the right to designate up to two (2)
members of the Executive Committee (``EC Members'') and IB Exchange
Corp has the right to designate one (1) EC Member. Under the Restated
Holdings LLC Agreement, any Member with the right to designate three
(3) Directors to the Holdings Board will have the right to designate up
to two (2) EC Members and any Member with the right to designate two
(2) Directors to the Holdings Board will have the right to designate
one (1) EC Member.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 40103.
    \29\ See proposed Restated Holdings LLC Agreement section
4.2(c). Other provisions relating to the composition of the
Executive Committee will be unchanged.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Subscribers will also have the right to designate one individual to
a new Advisory Committee organized by Holdings, the purpose of which
will be to advise and make recommendations to Holdings with respect to
the Exchange's competitiveness in the marketplace.\30\ Only Subscribers
will have the right to designate individuals to serve on the Advisory
Committee.\31\ The Advisory Committee will be advisory only and will
not have any powers, votes or fiduciary duties to Holdings.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 40103.
    \31\ See VPR Filing, supra note 6, at 4613.
    \32\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 40103.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Distributions

    The Restated Holdings LLC Agreement provides that, once per year,
Holdings will make a distribution (an ``Annual Distribution'') to its
Members to the extent funds are available for distribution.\33\ In
determining the amount of each Annual Distribution, the Holdings Board
will first provide for any regulatory needs of BOX and the Exchange, as
determined by the Exchange Board, and any Annual Distribution amounts
will be calculated after taking into account all financial and
regulatory needs of the Exchange, as determined by the Exchange.\34\
The Annual Distribution will be equal to 80% of Free Cash Flow,\35\
except as limited by applicable law, including for regulatory and
compliance purposes. In addition, another 15% of Free Cash Flow will be
included in the distribution, except to the extent the Holdings Board
determines that any portion thereof is (i) required for the operations
of Holdings and its subsidiaries, which will be reflected on the annual
budget for the next year, (ii) required for payment of liabilities or
expenses of Holdings, or (iii) required as a reserve to make reasonable
provision to pay other claims and obligations then known to, or
reasonably anticipated by, BOX or Holdings. When, as and if declared by
the Holdings Board, Holdings will make the cash distribution to each
Member pro rata in accordance with the number of Units held by each
Member, which will be determined by multiplying the aggregate Annual
Distribution amount by each Member's Percentage Interest \36\ on the
record date. Distributions to Class C Members may be adjusted as
provided in the Members Agreement.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See proposed Restated Holdings LLC Agreement section 8.1.
Distributions on Class C Units will not be paid until this proposed
rule change is effective. Distributions payable on Class C Units
that accrue before such effectiveness will be held in a segregated
account until such effectiveness. If this rule filing does not
become effective by July 1, 2016, a Subscriber may terminate its
involvement in the VPR Program and any and all distributions with
respect to Class C Units payable to that Subscriber held in the
segregated account will be released back to Holdings and distributed
to existing Members in accordance with the terms of the Holdings LLC
Agreement. See Notice, supra note 3, at 40104, n.21. See also VPR
Filing, supra note 6, at 4612, n.15.
    \34\ See proposed Restated Holdings LLC Agreement Section 8.1.
    \35\ ``Free Cash Flow'' means consolidated net income, plus
depreciation, less capital expenditures (in each case calculated in
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the
United States, as in effect from time to time) of Holdings and BOX,
for the calendar year. See proposed Restated Holdings LLC Agreement
Section 1.1.
    \36\ ``Percentage Interest'' with respect to a Member means the
ratio of the number of Units held by the Member to the total of all
of the issued Units, expressed as a percentage and determined with
respect to each class of Units, whenever applicable.
    \37\ See proposed Restated Holdings LLC Agreement Section 8.1
and see VPR Filing supra, note 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion

    The Commission has reviewed carefully the proposed rule change and
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.\38\ In particular, the Commission finds
that the proposed rule change is consistent with sections 6(b)(1) of
the Act,\39\ which, among other things, requires a national securities
exchange to be so organized and have the capacity to be able to carry
out the purposes of the Act, and to enforce compliance by its members
and persons associated with its members with the provisions of the Act,
the rules and regulations thereunder, and the rules of the exchange.
The Commission also finds that the proposal is consistent with section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\40\ which requires that the rules of the exchange
be 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ In approving the proposed rule changes, the Commission has
considered their impact on efficiency, competition and capital
formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \39\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(1).
    \40\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although Holdings does not carry out any regulatory functions, all
of its activities must be consistent with the Act. Holdings is the sole
owner of BOX, which owns and operates the BOX options trading platform
as a facility of the Exchange. As a facility of a national securities
exchange, the options trading platform is not solely a commercial
enterprise, but is an integral part of an SRO that is registered
pursuant to the Act and therefore subject to obligations imposed by the
Act. The Commission believes that the Restated Holdings LLC Agreement
is reasonably designed to enable Holdings to operate in a manner that
is consistent with this principle. In this regard, the Commission
believes that the proposed changes related to the VPR Program will not
impact provisions of Holding's corporate governance documents that were
designed to enable the Exchange and BOX to operate in a manner that
complies with the federal securities laws, and were intended to assist
the Exchange in fulfilling its self-regulatory obligations and
administering and complying with the requirements of the Act.\41\ The
Commission also believes

that the proposed rule change will allow the Commission to continue to
exercise its plenary regulatory authority over the Exchange and
continue to provide the Commission and the Exchange with access to
necessary information that will allow the Exchange to comply, and
enforce compliance, with the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66871 (April 27,
2012), 77 FR 26323, 26329-30 (May 3, 2012) (describing provisions in
governing documents designed to help maintain the independence of
the regulatory functions of the Exchange, including, but not limited
to, section 4.12(a) of the proposed Restated Holdings LLC Agreement,
which provides that each of the Members, Directors, Officers,
employees and agents of Holdings shall give due regard to the
preservation of the independence of the self-regulatory function of
the Exchange and to its obligations to investors and the general
public and shall not take actions which would interfere with the
effectuation of decisions by the board of directors of the Exchange
relating to its regulatory functions (including disciplinary
matters) or which would interfere with the Exchange's ability to
carry out its responsibilities under the Exchange Act, and section
4.12(b), which provides that Holdings and its Members shall comply
with the federal securities laws and the rules and regulations
thereunder and shall cooperate with the Commission and the Exchange
pursuant to and to the extent of their respective regulatory
authority).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to the Annual Distributions, the Commission notes the
Exchange represents that before making any distribution to its Members,
the Holdings Board will first provide for any regulatory needs of BOX
and the Exchange (as determined by the Exchange Board).\42\ The
Commission believes that the requirement to first provide for the
regulatory needs of BOX and the Exchange is designed to facilitate the
ability of the Exchange to fulfill its regulatory obligations under the
Act and help to ensure that the proposed provisions regarding
distributions maintain the independence of the Exchange's regulatory
function and would not be made in violation of the Exchange's legal and
regulatory responsibilities. The Commission therefore believes that the
proposed provisions in the Restated Holdings LLC Agreement related to
distributions are consistent with the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 40103 (``In determining the
amount of each Annual Distribution, the Holdings Board will first
provide for any regulatory needs of BOX and the Exchange, as
determined by the Exchange Board, and any Annual Distribution
amounts will be calculated after taking into account all financial
and regulatory needs of the Exchange, as determined by the
Exchange.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    For the foregoing reasons, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change is consistent with the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.
    IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, pursuant to section 19(b)(2) of the Act
\43\ that the proposed rule change (SR--BOX-2015-22) is approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-21672 Filed 9-1-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


Subject:	Chemistry Science Advisory Council (ChemSAC) Meeting Minutes

Meeting Date:	3 April 2013

To:		HED’s Chemistry Interest Group

From:		HED’s ChemSAC

Attendees:	See Attached

1.  Review of Minutes (03/27/2013)

Draft documents were finalized with minor revisions.

2.  Review of the Analysis of Two Proposed Tropical and Subtropical
Fruit Groups for Edible Peel and Inedible Peel.

ChemSAC and Canada PMRA agreed with the analysis of the USDA-IR-4
petitions presented by Dr. B. Schneider of the crop grouping focus group
to establish two new tropical fruit groups entitled:  "Tropical and
subtropical fruit group - edible peel 23” and  “Tropical and
subtropical fruit group - inedible peel 24."

The Tropical and subtropical fruit group - edible peel 23 will have 108
commodities and three crop subgroups.  The four representative
commodities are olive, fig, guava, and date.

Subgroup 23A:  Tropical and Subtropical, Small Fruit, Edible Peel
Subgroup - Representative Commodity:  Olive

Subgroup 23B:  Tropical and Subtropical, Medium to Large Fruit, Edible
Peel Subgroup - Representative Commodities:  Fig and Guava.

Subgroup 23C:  Tropical and Subtropical Palm Fruit, Edible Peel Subgroup
- Representative Commodity:  Date

The Tropical and subtropical fruit group - inedible peel 24 will have
104 commodities and five crop subgroups.  The eight representative
commodities are:  atemoya or sugar apple, avocado,   pomegranate or
banana, dragon fruit, prickly pear, fruit, lychee, passionfruit; and
pineapple.

Subgroup 24A:  Tropical and Subtropical, Small Fruit, Inedible Peel
Subgroup

Representative Commodity:  Lychee

Subgroup 24B:  Tropical and Subtropical, Medium to Large Fruit, Smooth,
Inedible Peel Subgroup

	Representative Commodities:  Avocado plus Pomegranate or Banana

Subgroup 24C:  Tropical and Subtropical, Medium to Large Fruit, Rough or
Hairy, Inedible Peel Subgroup

	Representative Commodities:  Pineapple plus Atemoya or Sugar apple

Subgroup 24D:  Tropical and Subtropical, Inedible Peel, Cactus Subgroup

	Representative Commodities:  Dragon fruit and Prickly pear, fruit

Subgroup 24E:  Tropical and Subtropical, Inedible Peel, Vine Subgroup

	Representative Commodity:  Passionfruit

ChemSAC provided some editorial comments on how to make the
representative commodities clear and these comments were incorporated
above in the crop subgroups.

Additional comments on guidance for changes in commodity definitions
under reregistration were discussed.  Future guidance will be prepared
by ChemSAC members to be discussed at a future meeting.

All supporting documents that were submitted for review and the slide
shows for this analysis will be stored in the ChemSAC minutes database.
Also the complete list of commodities for the two Tropical and
subtropical fruit crop groups and their individual crop subgroups are
listed in these documents.

571

  PAGE   \* MERGEFORMAT  1