[Federal Register: November 12, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 217)]
[Notices]
[Page 58287-58289]
[DOCID:fr12no09-56]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0803; FRL-8796-5]

Pseudomonas Fluorescens; Receipt of Application for Emergency
Exemption, Solicitation of Public Comment

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: EPA has received a quarantine exemption request from the
United States Department of Interior's Bureau of Reclamation to use the
pesticide Pseudomonas fluorescens CL145A (ATCC 55799) to treat
dams, water distribution (e.g., canals, pipes and plumbing), water
treatment, water pumping facilities, irrigation and power generation
facilities infested with invasive quagga and zebra mussels and
associated reservoirs, water holding marinas and watercraft,
recreational facilities (e.g., beaches, boat launches), fish hatcheries
and fish protection facilities (e.g., fish ladders and screens). The
applicant proposes the use of a new chemical which has not been
registered by the EPA. EPA is soliciting public comment before making
the decision whether or not to grant the exemption.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 27, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0803, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.

     Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket Facility's normal hours of operation (8:30
a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays).
Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. The Docket Facility telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2009-0803. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the docket without change and may be made available on-line at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or e-
mail. The regulations.gov website is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through regulations.gov,
your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part
of the comment that is placed in the docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the docket index
available at http://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet
and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly
available docket materials are available either in the electronic
docket at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard
copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac
Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The hours of
operation of this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

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

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
    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 this unit could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular
entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.

B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. 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 submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
     viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
    3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to achieve environmental
justice, the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of any group,
including minority and/or low income populations, in the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies. To help address potential environmental justice issues, the
Agency seeks information on any groups or segments of the population
who, as a result of their location, cultural practices, or other
factors, may have atypical or disproportionately high and adverse human
health impacts or environmental effects from exposure to the pesticide
discussed in this document, compared to the general population.

II. What Action is the Agency Taking?

    Under section 18 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) (7 U.S.C. 136p), at the discretion of the
Administrator, a Federal or State agency may be exempted from any
provision of FIFRA if the Administrator determines that emergency
conditions exist which require the exemption. The United States
Department of Interior's Bureau of Reclamation has requested the
Administrator to issue a quarantine exemption for the use of
Pseudomonas fluorescens CL145A to treat dams, water distribution (e.g.,
canals, pipes and

plumbing), water treatment, water pumping facilities, irrigation and
power generation facilities infested with invasive quagga and zebra
mussels and associated reservoirs, water holding marinas and
watercraft, recreational facilities (e.g., beaches, boat launches),
fish hatcheries and fish protection facilities (e.g., fish ladders and
screens). Information in accordance with 40 CFR part 166 was submitted
as part of this request.
    As part of this request, the applicant asserts that mussel
infestations are causing physical obstruction of flow in water
conveyance systems, ranging from roughening to complete blockage.
Intake structures such as pipes and screens are becoming clogged,
reducing delivery capacities, pumping capabilities, and hydropower
generation functions. Flow obstruction from mussel settlement at
Reclamation facilities has caused a significant increase in the
frequency of high temperature alarms in cooling systems, requiring
shut-downs for maintenance. It is often necessary to replace plugged
equipment to avoid lengthy interruptions in operations. Invasive
mussels affect all submerged components, conduits and other structures
such as trashracks, fish screens, raw water distribution systems for
turbine cooling, fire suppression systems, water intakes (service,
domestic, and irrigation), irrigation canals, gauging stations, weirs,
gates, diffuser gratings, drains, and virtually all types of
instrumentation in contact with raw water. Chemical degradation
(corrosion) of infrastructure is also resulting from mussel fouling of
metallic structures and equipment. These impacts are increasing both in
degree and frequency. The ongoing proliferation and dispersion of
mussel populations threatens to seriously impact Reclamation
operations, resulting in the interruption of hydropower and water
delivery at significant economic costs.
     Method of Application: MOI 401 (the product containing Pseudomonas
fluorescens CL145A) will be applied using standard aquatic pesticide
application equipment and or similar equipment commonly used for
chemical injection in drinking water treatment. This includes equipment
such as sprayers, mixers, injection pumps and/or weighted hoses. The
material will be contained and transported in totes or appropriate
plastic chemical application barrels. Application will be flow of
volume based. For enclosed and confined systems (i.e. canals,
irrigation, and pipes), treated water flow rates and chemical injection
pump flow rates can be measured by using flow meters and hand flow
measurements. Turbidity measurements before and after application can
be used as a surrogate to measure actual applied product.
     Maximum Rate of Application: Up to 200 ppm for up to 24 hours per
treatment.
     Maximum Number of Applications: Maximum of 12 applications of MOI
401 end use product (84059-L) per site.
     Maximum Amount of Pesticide to be Used: 60,000 kg active
ingredient, which equals approximately 411,000 kg of end use product.
     Maximum Volume to be Treated: Based on the maximum amount of
pesticide to be used and the treatment rate of 200 mg a.i./L, the
maximum volume of water that will be treated will be 1.67 acre-feet.
    This notice does not constitute a decision by EPA on the
application itself. The regulations governing section 18 of FIFRA
require publication of a notice of receipt of an application for a
quarantine exemption proposing use of a new chemical (i.e., an active
ingredient) which has not been registered by EPA.
The notice provides an opportunity for public comment on the
application.
    The Agency, will review and consider all comments received during
the comment period in determining whether to issue the quarantine
exemption requested by the United States Department of Interior's
Bureau of Reclamation.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Pesticides and pests.

    Dated: October 29, 2009.
G. Jeffrey Herndon,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

[FR Doc. E9-26822 Filed 11-10-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 217 (Tuesday, November 10, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69731-69734]
[FR Doc No: 2015-28513]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-76349; File No. SR-NYSEARCA-2015-97]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Requiring OTP
Holders To Participate in Business Continuity and Disaster Recovery
Plans Testing in Connection With Regulation Systems Compliance and
Integrity

November 4, 2015.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that, on October 26, 2015, NYSE Arca, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``NYSE Arca'') 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\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 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 require certain OTP Holders \4\ to
participate in

business continuity and disaster recovery plans (``BC/DR Plans'')
testing in connection with Regulation Systems Compliance and Integrity
(``Regulation SCI'').\5\ The text of the proposed rule change is
available on the Exchange's Web site at www.nyse.com, at the principal
office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Pursuant to Rule 1.1(q), an ``OTP Holder'' refers to a
natural person, in good standing, who has been issued an OTP. An OTP
Holder must be a registered broker or dealer pursuant to Section 15
of the Act. Rule 1.1(p) defines ``OTP'' as an Options Trading Permit
issued by the Exchange for effecting approved securities
transactions on the Exchange.
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73639 (November 19,
2014), 79 FR 72252 (December 5, 2014) (``SCI Adopting Release'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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
    As adopted by the Commission, Regulation SCI applies to certain
self-regulatory organizations (including the Exchange), alternative
trading systems (``ATSs''), plan processors, and exempt clearing
agencies (collectively, ``SCI entities''), and will require these SCI
entities to comply with requirements with respect to the automated
systems central to the performance of their regulated activities. Among
the requirements of Regulation SCI is Rule 1001(a)(2)(v), which
requires the Exchange and other SCI entities to maintain ``[b]usiness
continuity and disaster recovery plans that include maintaining backup
and recovery capabilities sufficiently resilient and geographically
diverse and that are reasonably designed to achieve next business day
resumption of trading and two-hour resumption of critical SCI systems
following a wide-scale disruption.'' \6\ As a matter of course, the
Exchange has put extensive time and resources toward planning for
system failures and already maintains robust BC/DR plans consistent
with the proposed rule. As set forth below, in connection with
Regulation SCI, the Exchange is proposing to require certain OTP
Holders to participate in testing of the operation of the Exchange's
BC/DR plans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 17 CFR 242.1001(a)(2)(v).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to an SCI entity's BC/DR plans, including its backup
systems, paragraph (a) of Rule 1004 of Regulation SCI requires each SCI
entity to: ``[e]stablish standards for the designation of those members
or participants that the SCI entity reasonably determines are, taken as
a whole, the minimum necessary for the maintenance of fair and orderly
markets in the event of the activation of such plans.'' \7\ Paragraph
(b) of Rule 1004 further requires each SCI entity to ``[d]esignate
members or participants pursuant to the standards established in
paragraph (a) of [Rule 1004] and require participation by such
designated members or participants in scheduled functional and
performance testing of the operation of such plans, in the manner and
frequency specified by the SCI entity, provided that such frequency
shall not be less than once every 12 months.'' \8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 17 CFR 242.1004(a).
    \8\ 17 CFR 242.1004(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To comply with Rule 1004 of Regulation SCI, the Exchange proposes
to adopt Rule 2.26, governing mandatory testing of Exchange backup
systems as described below. The requirements of proposed Rule 2.26
would apply to OTP Holders that transact on the Exchange's options
market.
    First, in paragraph (a) of proposed Rule 2.26, the Exchange
proposes to establish standards for the designation of OTP Holders that
the Exchange reasonably determines are, taken as a whole, the minimum
necessary for the maintenance of fair and orderly markets in the event
of the activation of the Exchange's business continuity and disaster
recovery plans.
    Second, in paragraph (b) of proposed Rule 2.26, the Exchange
proposes to specify that OTP Holders that are designated pursuant to
paragraph (a) of proposed Rule 2.26 would be required to participate in
scheduled functional and performance testing of the Exchange's business
continuity and disaster recovery plans, which shall not be less than
once every 12 months.
    Third, in paragraph (c) of proposed Rule 2.26, the Exchange
proposes to make clear that Lead Market Makers \9\ that have been
determined by the Exchange to contribute a meaningful percentage of the
Exchange's overall volume, measured on a quarterly or monthly basis,
will be required to participate in scheduled functional and performance
testing. The Exchange further proposes that it may also consider other
factors in determining the OTP Holders that will be required to
participate in scheduled functional and performance testing, including
average daily volume traded on the Exchange measured on a quarterly or
monthly basis, or OTP Holders who collectively account for a certain
percentage of market share on the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The term ``Lead Market Maker'' or ``LMM'' means an
individual or entity that has been deemed qualified by the Exchange
for the purpose of making transactions on the Exchange in accordance
with Rule 6.82. Each LMM must be registered with the Exchange as a
Market Maker. See Rule 6.1A(a)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Fourth, in paragraph (d) of proposed Rule 2.26, the Exchange
proposes that at least three (3) months prior to a scheduled functional
and performance testing of the Exchange's business continuity and
disaster recovery plans, the Exchange will publish the criteria to be
used by the Exchange to determine which OTP Holders will be required to
participate in such testing and notify those OTP Holders that are
required to participate based on such criteria.\10\ The Exchange
believes that the proposed notice requirements are necessary to provide
OTP Holders with proper advance notice in the event they become subject
to the proposed rule. The proposed timeframes would also provide OTP
Holders with adequate time to prepare for the testing, including any
systems changes needed, to connect to the Exchange's backup systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The Exchange will publish the initial notice to OTP Holders
no later than November 3, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, in paragraph (e) of proposed Rule 2.26, the Exchange
proposes to make clear that OTP Holders not designated pursuant to
standards established in paragraph (a) of proposed Rule 2.26 are
permitted to connect to the Exchange's backup systems and may
participate in testing of such systems. Proposed paragraph (e) is
consistent with Regulation SCI, which encourages ``SCI entities to
permit non-designated members or participants to participate in the
testing of the SCE entity's BC/DR plans if they request to do so.''
\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See SCI Adopting Release, supra note 5 at 72350.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes that it encourages all OTP Holders to connect to
the Exchange's backup systems and to participate in testing of such
systems. However, in adopting the requirements in proposed Rule 2.26,
the rule will subject only those OTP Holders to mandatory testing that
the Exchange believes are, taken as a whole, the minimum necessary to
maintain fair and orderly markets. The Exchange believes that
designating OTP Holders to participate in mandatory testing because

they, for example, account for a significant portion of the Exchange's
overall volume or maintain exclusive responsibilities with respect to
Exchange-listed securities is a reasonable means to ensure the
maintenance of a fair and orderly market on the Exchange.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\12\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Sections 6(b)(5) of the Act,\13\ 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 regulating,
clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and
facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to, and
perfect the mechanisms of, a free and open market and a national market
system and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest
and because it is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposal will ensure that the OTP Holders necessary to ensure
the maintenance of a fair and orderly market are properly designated
consistent with Rule 1004 of Regulation SCI. Specifically, as proposed,
the Exchange will adopt clear and objective criteria with respect to
the designation of OTP Holders that are required to participate in the
testing of the Exchange's BC/DR plans, as well as appropriate
notification regarding such designation. As set forth in the SCI
Adopting Release, ``SROs have the authority, and legal responsibility,
under Section 6 of the Exchange Act, to adopt and enforce rules
(including rules to comply with Regulation SCI's requirements relating
to BC/DR testing) applicable to their members or participants that are
designed to, among other things, foster cooperation and coordination
with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing
information with respect to, and 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.'' \14\ The Exchange believes
that this proposal is consistent with such authority and legal
responsibility.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See SCI Adopting Release, supra note 5 at 72350.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. To the contrary, the proposal
is not a competitive proposal but rather is necessary for the
Exchange's compliance with Regulation SCI.

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

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \15\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\16\
Because the 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 prior to
30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder. A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) \17\ normally does not become operative prior to 30 days after
the date of the filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b4(f)(6)(iii),\18\
the Commission may designate a shorter time if such action is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \17\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \18\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative
delay so that the proposal may become operative immediately upon
filing. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay
is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest
as it will allow the Exchange to incorporate changes required under
Regulation SCI, such as establishing standards for designating BCP/DR
participants, prior to the November 3, 2015 compliance date.
Accordingly, the Commission designates the proposed rule change to be
operative upon filing.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has also 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 under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \20\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2015-97 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2015-97. 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 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 Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Section, 100 F Street
NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. Copies of the filing will also be
available for inspection and copying at the NYSE's principal office and
on its Internet Web site at www.nyse.com. All comments received will be
posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal
identifying information from submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2015-97 and should be submitted
on or before December 1, 2015.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-28513 Filed 11-9-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


   UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

        ANN ARBOR, MI 48105

December 2, 2009

OFFICE OF

                       	               									             AIR AND
RADIATION

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:	Meeting with JSA and MLIT on June 29, 2009

FROM:	Mike Samulski

		Office of Transportation and Air Quality

TO:		Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0121

	On June 29, 2009, Mike Samulski, representing the U.S. EPA, met with
members of the Japanese Shipowners’ Association (JSA) and Japan’s
Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport, and Tourism (MLIT).  Lynn
Nadon, representing Environment Canada, also participated in this
discussion.  The purpose of this meeting was to give an overview of the
U.S./Canada proposal to the International Maritime Organization for
designation of a North American Emission Control Area.  The following
persons were also in attendance:

Maruta Shinichi	Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport, and Tourism

Shinichiro Otsubo	Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport, and
Tourism

Tetsuya Senda		National Maritime Research Institute

Eiichi Muraoka	National Maritime Research Institute

Nobuyuki Tanaka	Japan Ship Technology Research Association

Toshihiro Osarakawa	Japan Ship Technology Research Association

Osamu Handa		Japanese Shipowners’ Association

Masao Yamasaki	Japanese Shipowners’ Association

Kenichi Adachi	NYK Logistics & Megacarrier

Tamio Kawashima	NYK Logistics & Megacarrier

Tadahiro Koshisaka	NYK Logistics & Megacarrier

Hideyuki Koyama	K Line

Toshihiro Fukuzawa	K Line

Hideki Mizoguchi	Sanko Line

	The materials for this meeting are attached.  The first attachment is
the presentation given by Mike Samulski and Lynn Nadon.  The second
attachment is a list of questions provided by the Japanese
representatives.

ATTACHMENT 1

ATTACHMENT 2

Questions on the US/Canada ECA

Balance between the reduction of air pollutant and GHG emission)

In order to reduce one particular substance to ease environmental
burden, it is obviously effective if severe restriction is applied to
large area. However, such restriction often causes other negative
environmental effects (trade-off relation), which deserves careful
consideration. In terms of introduction of ECA for NOx, SOx and PM,
since the restriction of NOx, SOx and PM emission would cause the
increase in GHG emission, we should carefully consider the trade-off
with the GHG emission increase. The CO2 emission increase may consist of
the following four elements. We have obtained a preliminary estimate in
CO2 emission increase due to the 1st and 2nd factors.  The increase is
about 3% for ECA-affected shipping, which is not considered negligible
for global warming.  It should be noted that, as the size of the ECA
area is larger, the resulting increase in GHG emission would be greater.

-1 Refining of low sulphur fuel oil

   The production of low sulphur fuel oil needs more energy, thus
emitting more GHG, than the production of residual oil or high sulphur
oil (0.5%S or more), ECA proposed by US and Canada may cause large
amount of additional GHG emission.  Our preliminary estimation is that
the proposed ECA would result in approximately 1 million tons of CO2
increase.

-2  Production of urea

    A common production process of urea for SCR needs specific materials
and synthesizing process under high temperature and pressure, which
leads to substantial GHG emission (our rough estimation is
350g-CO2/kg-urea).  The 200 n.m. ECA would result in a large amount of
additional GHG emission ( 0.3-0.4 million tons of CO2 increase)

-3  Fuel penalty of engines

  It is reported that diesel engines would suffer 1% fuel penalty due to
pressure loss by operating an SCR.

-4   Effects of Rerouting (change in shipping route)

Due to high cost of fuel and urea, many ships would change shipping
route to take the shortest distance within the ECA. Such navigational
course is not necessarily the shortest route between ports, thus GHG
emissions may increase.

Considering trade-off relations, we are of the view that ECA, in
general, should be limited to those coastal sea areas which are adjacent
to highly polluted land areas due to dense ship traffic. We would very
much appreciate if you could provide any analysis that you have made on
the trade-off relation between ECA designation and GHG emission
increase.

Questions from viewpoint of other environmental assessment

-1   The effects of ECA have been estimated as for the year of 2020 in
US-Canada proposal. The sulphur limit of Annex VI is scheduled to be
reduced to 0.5% all over the world in 2020. It is not clear to us that
this significant change and its influence are included in your
assessment. In addition, the tier II requirement of NOx will gradually
reduce the volume of NOx even after 2020 as new ships are put into
service.

   Accordingly, volume of air pollutants may decrease in mid/long term
(e.g. 2030) because the total volume of air pollutant from ships is
expected to decrease by ever-increasing share of Tier II-compliant ships
as well as by global sulphur capping.  Your assessment on this issue
would be appreciated.

-2   We understand that the United States has set its own environmental
standards of Ozone and PM2.5 which are different from WHO guidelines.
However, the WHO guideline’s threshold values are used in the
proposal, of which reasoning would be helpful for our understanding.

-3    We would like to question the necessity of as large as 200 n.m.
for ECA limit.  Even if ECA is smaller (this includes several options
such as designating area less than 100 nautical mile off the shore or
designating only bay or port areas etc. ), it seems that the threshold
values of WHO guidelines could be satisfied.  For instance, the
presented simulation results show that most of the air pollutant
concentration (PM2.5 etc.) in western Canadian area is below the WHO
guideline’s value, with some exception of Ozone in very limited area.

-4       Although the proposed ECA includes Alaska and Hawaii, there is
no simulation result presented for these areas.  Relevant data would be
appreciated.

-5       We could not evaluate the growth rates of the activity and the
changes of the emission factor between 2002 and 2020 applied in the
US/Canada proposal, due to the lack of the data. Additional information,
e.g. inventory data in 2002, would be helpful.

-6       The assessment of human health influence is based on the case
where the whole 200-nm ECA is applied. However, since there is
considerable difference in air pollutant concentration in each region,
it seems more reasonable if the regional differences are considered in
the assessment.  Your views on this would be helpful.

-7   The relation between the deposition amount of pollutants and the
influence on the ecosystem is not quantitatively shown in the proposal.
Is our understanding correct that such quantitative analysis is not
technically possible?

Questions from viewpoint of implementation

-1	 As mentioned in the proposal, fuel switching to low sulphur oils
need fuel oil line’s modifications. Since such modification would
require the work at dry-dock, it would be necessary to consider the
capacity of such work and lead time.  Relevant information on such
consideration of the implementation timing and capacity would be
helpful.

-2	   We are of the view that due attention should be paid to whether
the ‘infrastructure’ of supplying low sulphur fuel oil and urea
solution is sufficiently established.  Any analysis in this respect
would be appreciated.

Other questions

	    We would like to know the relationship between the proposed ECA and
restriction and California State’s new regulation regarding low
sulphur fuel which starts on July 1st. Our understanding through the
communication with the US side is that the proposal and its early
adoption is of an absolute necessity to block US regional regulatory
initiatives, which we see as very positive element of the US/Canada
proposal.  However, it seems that California regulation would be
implemented anyway, being unaffected by the ECA proposal; further
explanation would be appreciated.

 PAGE

 PAGE   2


[Federal Register: December 11, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 239)]
[Notices]
[Page 75424-75425]
[DOCID:fr11de08-53]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings  1

November 26, 2008.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG09-18-000.
    Applicants: Milford Power Company, LLC
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of Milford Power Company, LLC.
    Filed Date: 11/24/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081124-5028.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, December 15, 2008.

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

    Docket Numbers: ER00-2738-008; ER99-1004-009; ER01-1721-006; ER00-
2740-008; ER02-564-006; ER06-653-003.
    Applicants: Entergy Nuclear Fitzpatrick, LLC, Entergy Nuclear
Generation Company, Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 2, LLC, Entergy
Nuclear Indian Point 3, LLC, Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, LLC,
Entergy Nuclear Power Marketing, LLC.
    Description: Entergy Nuclear Affiliates submits revisions and
clarification to the 6/30/08 filing as requested by FERC Staff.
    Filed Date: 11/21/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081124-0330.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, December 1, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER05-699-007.
    Applicants: Xcel Energy Services Inc.
    Description: Xcel Energy Services Inc. submits Service Agreement
393 between Northern States Power Co et al. and City of Sleepy Eye etc.
    Filed Date: 11/24/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081125-0202.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, December 15, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-615-034.
    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation
    Description: California Independent System Operator Corp submits a
revised pro forma sheet of the pro forma Reliability Must-Run Contract.
    Filed Date: 11/21/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081125-0106.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, December 12, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-1006-002.
    Applicants: Entergy Services, Inc.
    Description: Entergy Mississippi, Inc submits an updated Appendix H
to the Amended and Restated Interconnection and Operating Agreement
with Southaven Power, LLC.
    Filed Date: 11/24/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081126-0122.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, December 15, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-1410-001.
    Applicants: PacifiCorp.
    Description: PacifiCorp submits its Refund Report.
    Filed Date: 11/24/2008
    Accession Number: 20081124-5076.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, December 15, 2008

    Docket Numbers: ER08-1435-002.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
submits proposed revisions to its Open Access Transmission and Energy
Markets Tariff in compliance with the Commission's 10/24/08 Order.
    Filed Date: 11/24/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081126-0121.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, December 15, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-117-001.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc
submits a Large Generator Interconnection Agreement with Stony Brook
Wind, LLC et al.
    Filed Date: 11/24/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081126-0120.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, December 15, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-318-000.
    Applicants: Safe Harbor Holding Company, LLC.
    Description: Request of Safe Harbor Holding Co, LLC for
authorization to sell energy and capacity at market-based rates etc.
    Filed Date: 11/24/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081126-0136.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, December 15, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-322-000; ER09-323-000; ER09-324-000; ER09-325-
000.
    Applicants: Idaho Power Company.
    Description: Idaho Power Company submits Revised Network
Integration Transmission Service Agreement, Nos. 153, 154, 155, and
156.
    Filed Date: 11/21/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081125-0105.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, December 12, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-326-000.
    Applicants: Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC.
    Description: Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC submits a non-conforming
long-term Transmission Service Agreement between DE Carolinas et al.
    Filed Date: 11/21/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081125-0104.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, December 12, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-327-000.
    Applicants: Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, L.L.C., Entergy Texas,
Inc.
    Description: Entergy Services, Inc on behalf of Entergy Gulf States
Louisiana, LLC et. al submits Order No. 164-conformed versions of the
Rate Schedules filed on 4/22/08.
    Filed Date: 11/21/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081125-0107.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, December 12, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-329-000.
    Applicants: PSEG Power Connecticut LLC.
    Description: PSEG Power Connecticut, LLC's request for limited
waiver of Forward Capacity Market Rules and request for FERC Ruling
within sixty days.
    Filed Date: 11/24/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081126-0134.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, December 15, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-330-000.
    Applicants: Xcel Energy Services Inc.
    Description: Xcel Energy Services, Inc., on behalf of Southwestern
Public Service Company, submits a Connection Agreement with Golden
Spread Electric Cooperative, Inc. et. al.
    Filed Date: 11/24/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081126-0133.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, December 15, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-331-000.
    Applicants: Xcel Energy Services Inc.
    Description: Xcel Energy Services, Inc., on behalf of Southwestern
Public Service Co submits the proposed cancellation of 72 Point-to-
Point Service Agreements.
    Filed Date: 11/24/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081126-0131.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, December 15, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-332-000.

    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.
    Description: California Independent System Operator Corporation
submits an executed Amended and Restated Metered Subsystem Agreement
between the CAISO and the City of Anaheim, California.
    Filed Date: 11/24/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081126-0127.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, December 15, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-333-000.
    Applicants: MidAmerican Energy Company.
    Description: MidAmerican Energy Co. submits Notice of Cancellation
of the Operating Agreement with the Board of Trustees of Municipal
Electric Utility of Algona, IA.
    Filed Date: 11/24/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081126-0132.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, December 15, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-334-000.
    Applicants: Northern States Power Company.
    Description: Northern States Power Companies submits notices of
cancellation for two Non-Firm Transmission Service Agreements with
Wisconsin Public Power, Inc.
    Filed Date: 11/24/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081126-0130.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, December 15, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-335-000.
    Applicants: J.P. Morgan Ventures Energy Corporation.
    Description: JP Morgan Ventures Energy Corp submits a Notice of
Succession to inform FERC that it adopts Bear Energy's market based
rate schedule, Rate Schedule 1.
    Filed Date: 11/24/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081126-0129.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, December 15, 2008.

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

    Docket Numbers: ES09-10-001.
    Applicants: Baltimore Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Baltimore Gas and Electric Company submits a revised
worksheet for computation of interest coverage.
    Filed Date: 11/25/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081125-5167.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, December 5, 2008.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following open access
transmission tariff filings:

    Docket Numbers: OA07-40-004.
    Applicants: Portland General Electric Company.
    Description: Amendment to Application of Portland General Electric
Company to add section 2.2 rollover rights language to PGE's Order 890
OATT compliance filing.
    Filed Date: 11/17/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081117-5187.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, December 8, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: OA08-96-002.
    Applicants: Southern Company Services, Inc.
    Description: Southern Company Services, Inc. submits the Order No.
890 OATT Compliance Regarding Late Study Penalty Distribution
Methodology.
    Filed Date: 11/24/2008
    Accession Number: 20081124-5170.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, December 15, 2008.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to
make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://
www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St. NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance
with any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-29340 Filed 12-10-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 71 (Monday, April 14, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20896-20897]
[FR Doc No: 2014-08371]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2010-0164]

National Boating Safety Advisory Council

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of Federal Advisory Committee Meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The National Boating Safety Advisory Council (NBSAC) will meet
on May 8-9, 2014, in Arlington, VA, to discuss issues relating to
recreational boating safety. The meetings will be open to the public.

DATES: NBSAC will meet Thursday, May 8, 2014, from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00
p.m. and Friday, May 9, 2014, from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. Please note
that the meetings may conclude early if NBSAC has completed all
business.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held in the Ballroom of the Holiday Inn
Arlington (http://www.hiarlington.com), 4610 N Fairfax Drive,
Arlington, VA 22203.
    For information on facilities or services for individuals with
disabilities or to request special assistance at the meeting, contact
Mr. Jeff Ludwig, Alternate Designated Federal Officer (ADFO), telephone
202-372-1061, or at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    To facilitate public participation, we are inviting public comment
on the issues to be considered by the committee as listed in the
``Agenda'' section below. Written comments for distribution to Council
members must be submitted no later than April 30, 2014, and must be
identified by (USCG-2010-0164) and may be submitted by one of the
following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    Follow the instructions for submitting comments (preferred method
to avoid delays in processing).
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department
of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: Same as mail address above between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The
telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the words
``Department of Homeland Security'' and the docket number for this
action. Comments received will be posted without alteration at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. You
may review a Privacy Act notice regarding public dockets in the January
17, 2008, issue of the Federal Register (73 FR 3316).
    Docket: For access to the docket to read documents or comments
related to this notice, go to http://www.regulations.gov, enter the
docket number in the ``Search'' field and follow instructions on the
Web site.
    Public oral comment periods will be held each day. Speakers are
requested to limit their comments to 3 minutes. Please note that the
public comment periods may end before the time indicated, following the
last call for comments. Contact Mr. Jeffrey Ludwig as indicated below
to register as a speaker.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Jeff Ludwig, ADFO for NBSAC,
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, or at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have
questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Cheryl
Collins, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice of this meeting is given under the
Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C. Appendix 2. Congress
established NBSAC in the Federal Boat Safety Act of 1971 (Pub. L. 92-
75). NBSAC currently operates under the authority of 46 U.S.C. 13110,
which requires the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Commandant of
the Coast Guard by delegation to consult with NBSAC in prescribing
regulations for recreational vessels and associated equipment, and on
other major safety matters. See 46 U.S.C. 4302(c) and 13110(c).

Meeting Agenda

    The agenda for the NBSAC meeting is as follows:

Thursday, May 8, 2014

    (1) Opening Remarks, Swearing-In of New Members and Presentation of
Awards to Outgoing Members.
    (2) Receipt and discussion of the following reports:
    (a) Chief, Office of Auxiliary and Boating Safety, Update on the
Coast Guard's implementation of NBSAC Resolutions and Recreational
Boating Safety Program report.
    (b) Alternate Designated Federal Officer's report concerning
Council administrative and logistical matters.
    (3) Presentation and discussion on the Uniform Certificate of Title
Act--Vessel (UCOTA-V).
    (4) Presentation and discussion on the Coast Guard's life jacket
carriage requirements and exemptions found in 33 CFR 175.
    (5) Presentation and discussion on the Coast Guard's progress in
implementing NBSAC's Recommendation Regarding the Development of New
Life Jacket Standards and Approval Processes for Life Jackets.
    (6) Receipt and Discussion of the Strategic Planning Subcommittee
report.
    (7) Public comment.

Friday, May 9, 2014

    (1) Receipt and Discussion of the Boats and Associated Equipment
and Prevention through People Subcommittee reports.

    (2) Discussion of any recommendations to be made to the Coast
Guard.
    (3) Public comment period.
    There will be a comment period for NBSAC and a comment period for
the public after each subcommittee report, but before each
recommendation is formulated. The Council will review the information
presented on each issue, deliberate on any recommendations presented in
the subcommittee reports, and formulate recommendations for the
Department's consideration.
    A more detailed agenda and all meeting documentation can be found
at: http://homeport.uscg.mil/NBSAC, no later than April 23, 2014.
Alternatively, you may contact Mr. Jeff Ludwig as noted in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above.

    Dated: April 8, 2014.
Jonathan C. Burton,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Director of Inspections and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2014-08371 Filed 4-11-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P