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

                                                           DP Barcode:  D424686
                                                               PC Code:  128968
                                                       Date:  February 19, 2015

MEMORANDUM

Subject:	EFED's Response to Comments on the Problem Formulation for Fluroxypyr-MHE

To:		Neil Anderson, Branch Chief
		Benjamin Askin, Chemical Review Manager
		Risk Management and Implementation Branch I
		Pesticide Re-evaluation Division

Through:	Dana Spatz, Branch Chief
		Environmental Risk Branch III
		Environmental Fate and Effects Division

From:		Nicholas Mastrota, Wildlife Biologist
		Rochelle F. H. Bohaty, Chemist
		Environmental Risk Branch III
		Environmental Fate and Effects Division

Peer Review:	Rosanna Louie-Juzwiak, RAPL
		Environmental Risk Branch III
		Environmental Fate and Effects Division

This memo communicates the response of the Environmental Fate and Effects Division (EFED) to comments received from Dow AgroSciences (DAS) on the Problem Formulation for the Registration Review of fluroxypyr-methylheptyl ester (PC Code 128968).

Comment #1 (Page 3):
DAS agrees that the LOQ of fluroxypyr-MHE residues in water (0.05 μg/L) [MRID 48581303] is sufficient considering the current toxicological endpoints of terrestrial plants.  An independent laboratory validation for this water method is available and will be submitted upon request.

EFED Response #1:
EFED would like to obtain this independent laboratory validation of the analytical method for measuring fluroxypyr-MHE in water.

Comment #2 (Page 4):
Data on the effects of fluroxypyr-MHE on the growth of Navicula can be taken from this study previously submitted:  Fluroxypyr-MHE "Hoberg, J (2002). Fluroxypyr 1-mepthylheptyl ester technical  -  acute toxicity to the freshwater diatom (Navicula pelliculosa).  Springborn Smithers Laboratories.  DowAgroSciences Study No. 021041. Unpublished report. MRID 45820801".

EFED Response #2:
The 2002 freshwater diatom study, MRID 45820801, was inadvertently excluded from the review of ecotoxicity data in the problem formulation document. An EFED review of this study has identified numerous serious deficiencies:

The number of replicates per treatment level (3) is less than recommended (4).
The dilution water characteristics were not reported.
Cell growth in the solvent control was significantly greater than in the negative control, indicating that the solvent (DMF) enhanced growth of the diatoms.
Cell growth was very inconsistent among replicates within a treatment group, and mean cell growth did not follow a consistent dose-response among the treatment groups.
The test material, fluroxypyr-MHE, transformed into fluroxypyr acid at different rates in different test concentrations. At lower test concentrations, the transformation to the acid was nearly total by the end of the 5-day study. At the highest test concentrations, in which all of the diatoms were killed, very little transformation occurred. The intermediate test concentrations, 0.30 and 0.71 mg a.i./L, had intermediate rates of transformation. As the toxicity of the fluroxypyr acid is likely different than that of fluroxypyr-MHE, this inconsistent transformation may have impacted the study results.
The 120-hour recovery for the measured 0.17 (68%), 0.30 (59%) and 1.3 (63%) ppm treatment groups was less than 70% of the nominal 0.25, 0.50 and 2.0 ppm treatment groups, respectively.

Consequently, this study was classified as INVALID. A new study is still needed to provide acceptable toxicity data for this species.

Comment #3 (Page 5):
Dow AgroSciences has also conducted a study with fluroxypyr-acid and Navicula and this is available for review by EFED at request. "Hoberg, J (2002). Fluroxypyr  -  growth inhibition test with the freshwater diatom (Navicula pelliculosa).  TERC.  DowAgroSciences Study No. 031132. Unpublished report".

EFED Response #3:
EFED would like to receive this freshwater diatom study with fluroxypyr-acid for review.

Comment #4(Page 5):
Data has been reviewed by EFED on several studies conducted by Mohr et al., 2013. DowAgroSciences would like to highlight that these studies were conducted on fluroxypyr acid. Hence the values used in EFED review are mg a.e./L. Furthermore this paper evaluates a range of study designs and exposes plants at different growth stages; careful comparisons and conclusions should be made from the results of these studies containing fluroxypyr-acid.

EFED Response #4:
The studies reported in Mohr et al., 2013 do appear to have been conducted with fluroxypyr acid. EFED incorrectly reported the results as mg a.i./L rather than mg a.e./L. The discussion of these results on page 26 of the Problem Formulation, and the presentation of the results in Table IV.1, will be revised accordingly in the Preliminary Risk Assessment.

Comment #5 (p. 5):
Dow AgroSciences has conducted water milfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum) studies with fluroxypyr-MHE and fluroxypyr acid and these are available for review by EFED. These studies were conducted in water/sediment systems where the water column was spiked with the test material.  The method that was followed at the time these studies were conducted is now a published OECD Guideline (No. 239). "Gonsior, G. (2013). Fluroxypyr-meptyl - Growth inhibition of Myriophyllum spicatum in a water/sediment system. Eurofins AgroScience Services EcoChem GmbH. DAS Study no. 120747. Unpublished report."  Also "Gonsior, G. (2012). Fluroxypyr - Growth inhibition of Myriophyllum spicatum in a water/sediment system. Eurofins AgroScience Services EcoChem GmbH. DAS Study no. 120748. Unpublished report".

EFED Response #5:
These studies of the toxicity of fluroxypyr-MHE and fluroxypyr acid to milfoil would be useful for the risk assessment of fluroxypyr-MHE.  EFED would like to receive both of these studies.

Comment #6 (page 5):
Data on acute oral toxicity of fluroxypyr-MHE to adult honeybees can be taken from the following study previously submitted. The 48-hour oral LD50 value is > 100 ug/bee indicating low toxicity to adult honeybees. "Cole, J (1983).  The acute contact and oral toxicity to honeybees of technical Dowco 433  -  MH ester: laboratory project ID: DWC 387/73717/2. Unpublished study prepared by Huntingdon research centre. (MRID 40244527)"

EFED Response #6:
As shown in Table VI.3 of the Problem Formulation, EFED reviewed the honey bee study MRID 40244527 and classified it as Supplemental. According to the Data Evaluation Record for this study, the study methods deviated significantly from the recommended protocol, and some important information about the study methods were not reported. The newer honey bee study, MRID 42137313, which was classified as Acceptable, will therefore be used for assessing risk to bees.

Comment #7 (pages 6-7):
Conducting [the chronic oral toxicity study with adult honeybees] is unlikely to provide more information for the pollinator risk assessment due to the lack of toxicity and sublethal effects observed in the acute oral study with adult honeybees... [The chronic oral toxicity study with honeybee larvae is not needed because] the toxicity of fluroxypyr-MHE to the larvae is likely to be very low based on known toxicity of this active to adult honeybees via both the oral and contact routes of exposure.  Without a published guideline and laboratories experienced in conducting these studies, results maybe variable and unreliable.

EFED Response #7:
A June 23, 2014 guidance memorandum titled, Guidance for Assessing Pesticide Risk to Bees, advises that chronic oral toxicity tests with adult and larval honey bees are needed as tier-1 screening-level tests for all pesticides that have uses that could result in exposure to bees. Similar to other taxa evaluated by EPA, the chronic testing requirements for bees are not contingent on results observed in acute tests. Use of fluroxypyr-MHE is expected to result in some oral exposure to bees. Therefore, these studies are considered necessary.

While formal test guidelines are not currently available for these studies, guidance for conducting chronic oral testing of adult and larval honey bees is available, including a draft OECD guideline for a honey bee larval test with repeated doses. Several testing laboratories also have experience with conducting these types of tests and have submitted both 10-day adult and 21-day larval toxicity tests in support of registration. EPA recommends that proposed protocols for conducting these tests be submitted for review and comment before the tests are initiated.

Comment #8 (page 6):
There is low toxicity of fluroxypyr-meptyl to adult honeybees observed in the acute contact studies (100 ug/bee and >25 ug/bee) and so exposure via foliage residues of fluroxypyr-meptyl is also likely to be practically non-toxic.

EFED Response #8:
We agree with the DAS's comment. Since there is an acceptable acute contact study showing that fluroxypyr-MHE is not acutely toxic to the honeybee, the "Honey Bee Toxicity of Residues on Foliage" study (GLN 850.3030) should not be needed. EFED recommends that the status of this guideline be changed from "Reserved pending outcome of tier 1 studies" to "Not required."

Comment #9 (page 6-7)
EPA has requested a new compost study due to some apparent shortcomings cited by EPA EFED during a cursory review of a study previously submitted by Dow AgroSciences ("Herbicide content changes in bench-scale compost made with fluroxypyr and dicamba treated grass clippings", MRID 45833601).  The EFED response was dated September 3, 2003 (DP Barcode D293064, PC Code: 128959).  In the review the EPA EFED scientist indicate that "The submitted study was conducted at 60°C continuously, which may have underestimated the persistence of the chemical and therefore the risk to non-target plants from contaminated compost."  However, this assertion is clearly not the case in that the study was a "self-heating study" which relied on natural temperature fluctuations as a result of the composting process...

In contrast to some other members of the pyridine class of herbicides, after many years of use there have been no adverse effects reported for damage to plants resulting from fluroxypyr in compost.  There are several reasons for this, in particular  due to use patterns,  lower potency of fluroxypyr relative to other pyridine herbicides,  and  a higher degradation rate in compost (ie, much less persistent) due to differences in physical chemistry.

EFED Response #9:
Additional data are needed to address the deficiencies noted in the problem formulation for fluroxypyr-MHE and fluroxypyr acid compost study (MRID 45833601) previously submitted to the Agency; otherwise a new study is needed. The deficiencies were identified based on a recent review of the study and not on the cursory review dated September 3, 2003. As noted in the problem formulation the study deficiencies include: 1) no methods (including an independent lab validation) or control spike analysis were provided to support the analytical procedures used in the study, 2) recoveries were variable, 3) dilution due to sample withdrawal and consolidation of multiple samples was not adequately described, and 4) a comparison of the composting method with typical composting practices was not provided.

While after many years of use there have been no adverse effects reported for damage to plants resulting from fluroxypyr residues in compost, it is unclear if compost samples have been analyzed for fluroxypyr residues. Also, EPA is unaware of an analytical method for detecting fluroxypyr residues in compost. Thus, the presence or absence of the residues cannot be determined. If methods were available, these methods would need to be at or below levels of toxicological concern (0.00083 lb a.e./A) in order to rule out the potential effect of fluroxypyr residues in compost.

Currently, there are no environmental chemistry methods sensitive enough to detect fluroxypyr-MHE or fluroxypyr acid at levels of toxicological concern (0.00083 lb a.e./A). The lowest detection limit reported for fluroxypyr acid in soil is 3 ug/kg (0.007 a.e. lb/A). An independent laboratory validation has also not been submitted for the environmental chemistry method in water.


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 134 (Friday, July 12, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 33167-33169]
[FR Doc No: 2019-14882]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2019-0534]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Fireworks Display, Great Egg Harbor Bay, Ocean City,
NJ

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on the
waters of the Great Egg Harbor Bay in Ocean City, NJ, from 9:30 p.m. to
10:30 p.m. on July 13, 2019, during the Ocean City Nights in Venice
fireworks display. The safety zone is necessary to ensure the safety of
participant vessels, spectators, and the boating public during the
event. This regulation prohibits persons and non-participant vessels
from entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within
the safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port (COTP)
Delaware Bay or a designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 9:30 p.m. through 10:30 p.m. on July
13, 2019.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2019-0534 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Petty Officer Thomas Welker, Sector Delaware Bay,
Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone (215) 271-
4814, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the Port
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice
and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because it is impracticable and contrary to
the public interest to do so. There is insufficient time to allow for a
reasonable comment period prior to the date of the event. The rule must
be in force by July 13, 2019. We are taking immediate action to ensure
the safety of spectators and the general public from hazards associated
with the fireworks display. Hazards include accidental discharge of
fireworks, dangerous projectiles, and falling hot embers or other
debris.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of
this rule would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest
because immediate action is needed to mitigate the potential safety
hazards associated with a fireworks displays in this location by July
13, 2019.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C.
70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231). The Captain of the Port Delaware Bay
(COTP) has determined that potential hazards associated with this
display will be a safety concern for anyone within a 600-foot radius of
the barge launching the fireworks. The purpose of this rule is to
ensure safety of vessels and the navigable waters in the safety zone
before, during, and after the scheduled event.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a temporary safety zone on the waters of the
Great Egg Harbor Bay in Ocean City, NJ, during a fireworks display
scheduled to take place between 9:30 p.m. and 10:30 p.m. on July 13,
2019. The fireworks will be set off from a barge in the bay, which will
be anchored at approximate position latitude 39[deg]17'23.65'' N,
longitude 074[deg]34'31.29'' W. The safety zone includes all navigable
waters within 600 feet of the fireworks barge. No person or vessel will
be permitted to enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within the
safety zone without obtaining permission from the COTP Delaware Bay or
a designated representative. If the COTP Delaware Bay or a designated
representative grants authorization to enter, transit through, anchor
in, or remain within the safety zone, all persons and vessels receiving
such authorization must comply with the instructions of the COTP
Delaware Bay or a designated representative. The Coast Guard will
provide public notice of the safety zone by Local Notice to Mariners
and Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders and we discuss
First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This rule has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, the rule has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
    The impact of this rule is not significant for the following
reasons: (1) The enforcement period will last one hour when vessel
traffic is usually low; (2) although persons and vessels may not enter,
transit through, anchor in, or remain within the safety zone without
authorization from the COTP Delaware Bay or a designated
representative, portions of the channel will remain open. Persons and
vessels will be able to operate in the surrounding area during the
enforcement period; (3) persons and vessels will still be able to
enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within the regulated area
if authorized by the COTP Delaware Bay or a designated representative;
and (4) the Coast Guard will provide advance notification of the safety
zone to the local maritime community by Local Notice to Mariners,
Broadcast Notice to

Mariners, and on-scene actual notice from designated representatives.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
IV.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on
any vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01 and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series),
which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made
a determination that this action is one of a category of actions that
do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the
human environment. This rule involves a safety zone that will prohibit
persons and vessels from entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or
remaining within a limited area on the navigable water in the Great Egg
Harbor Bay, during a fireworks display lasting approximately one hour.
Normally, such actions are categorically excluded from further review
under paragraph L60(a) in Table 3-1 of U.S. Coast Guard Environmental
Planning Implementing Procedures 5090.1. A Record of Environmental
Consideration (REC) supporting this determination is available in the
docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places, or vessels.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

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

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T05-0534 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T05-0534  Safety Zone; Fireworks Display, Great Egg Harbor
Bay, Ocean City, NJ.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All waters of
Great Egg Harbor Bay off Ocean City, NJ, within 600 feet of the barge
anchored in approximate position latitude 39[deg]17'23.65'' N,
longitude 074[deg]34'31.29'' W.
    (b) Definitions. As used in this section, designated representative
means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a Coast Guard petty
officer, warrant or commissioned officer on board a Coast Guard vessel
or on board a Federal, State, or local law enforcement vessel assisting
the Captain of the Port (COTP), Delaware Bay in the enforcement of the
safety zone.
    (c) Regulations. (1) Under the general safety zone regulations in
subpart C of this part, you may not enter the safety zone described in
paragraph (a) of this section unless authorized by the COTP or the
COTP's designated representative.
    (2) To seek permission to enter or remain in the zone, contact the
COTP or the COTP's representative via VHF-FM channel 16 or 215-271-
4807. Those in the safety zone must comply with all lawful orders or
directions given to them by the COTP or the COTP's designated
representative.

    (3) No vessel may take on bunkers or conduct lightering operations
within the safety zone during its enforcement period.
    (4) This section applies to all vessels except those engaged in law
enforcement, aids to navigation servicing, and emergency response
operations.
    (d) Enforcement. The U.S. Coast Guard may be assisted in the patrol
and enforcement of the safety zone by Federal, State, and local
agencies.
    (e) Enforcement period. This zone will be enforced from
approximately 9:30 p.m. to 10:30 p.m. on July 13, 2019.

    Dated: July 9, 2019.
Scott E. Anderson,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Delaware Bay.
[FR Doc. 2019-14882 Filed 7-11-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 64 (Wednesday, April 5, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16630-16632]
[FR Doc No: 2017-06765]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2006-0028]

MET Laboratories, Inc.: Grant of Expansion of Recognition and
Modification to the NRTL Program's List of Appropriate Test Standards

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

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In this notice, OSHA announces its final decision to expand
the scope of recognition for MET Laboratories, Inc., as a Nationally
Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL).

DATES: The expansion of the scope of recognition becomes effective on
April 5, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Information regarding this notice is
available from the following sources:
    Press inquiries: Contact Mr. Frank Meilinger, Director, OSHA Office
of

Communications, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW.,
Room N-3647, Washington, DC 20210; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    General and technical information: Contact Mr. Kevin Robinson,
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; telephone:
(202) 693-2110; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>OSHA's Web page includes
information about the NRTL Program (see http://www.osha.gov/dts/otpca/nrtl/index.html).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Notice of Final Decision

    OSHA hereby gives notice of the expansion of the scope of
recognition of MET Laboratories, Inc. (MET), as a NRTL. MET's expansion
covers the addition of five test standards to its scope of recognition,
including one test standard that will be added to the NRTL List of
Appropriate Test Standards.
    OSHA recognition of an NRTL signifies that the organization meets
the requirements specified by 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 of the products.
    The Agency processes applications by a NRTL for initial
recognition, or for expansion or renewal of this recognition, following
requirements in Appendix A to 29 CFR 1910.7. This appendix requires
that the Agency publish two notices in the Federal Register in
processing an application. In the first notice, OSHA announces the
application and provides its preliminary finding and, in the second
notice, the Agency provides its final decision on the application.
These notices set forth the NRTL's scope of recognition or
modifications of that scope. OSHA maintains an informational Web page
for each NRTL that details its scope of recognition. These pages are
available from the Agency's Web site at http://www.osha.gov/dts/otpca/nrtl/index.html.
    MET submitted five applications, four dated July 7, 2015 (OSHA-
2006-0028-0026), (OSHA-2006-0028-0027), (OSHA-2006-0028-0028), (OSHA-
2006-0028-0029) and one dated August 4, 2015 (OSHA-2006-0028-0025), to
expand its recognition to include five additional test standards. OSHA
staff performed a comparability analysis and reviewed other pertinent
information. OSHA did not perform any on-site reviews in relation to
this application.
    OSHA published the preliminary notice announcing MET's expansion
application in the Federal Register on November 15, 2016 (81 FR 80089).
The Agency requested comments by November 30, 2016, but it received no
comments in response to this notice. OSHA now is proceeding with this
final notice to grant expansion of MET's scope of recognition.
    To obtain or review copies of all public documents pertaining to
the MET's application, go to www.regulations.gov or contact the Docket
Office, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department
of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Room N-2625, Washington, DC
20210. Docket No. OSHA-2006-0028 contains all materials in the record
concerning MET's recognition.

II. Final Decision and Order

    OSHA staff examined MET's expansion applications, its capability to
meet the requirements of the test standards, and other pertinent
information. Based on its review of this evidence, OSHA finds that MET
meets the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.7 for expansion of its
recognition, subject to the limitation and conditions listed below.
OSHA, therefore, is proceeding with this final notice to grant MET's
scope of recognition. OSHA limits the expansion of MET's recognition to
testing and certification of products for demonstration of conformance
to the test standards listed in Table 1 below.

 Table 1--List of Appropriate Test Standards for Inclusion in MET's NRTL
                          Scope of Recognition
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Test standard                     Test standard title
------------------------------------------------------------------------
UL 62368-1...........................  Audio/Video, Information and
                                        Communication Technology
                                        Equipment--Part 1: Safety
                                        Requirements.
UL 60079-0...........................  Explosive Atmospheres--Part 0:
                                        Equipment--General Requirements.
UL 60079-2...........................  Explosive Atmospheres--Part 2:
                                        Equipment Protection by
                                        Pressurized Enclosure ``p''.
UL 60079-11..........................  Explosive Atmospheres--Part 11:
                                        Equipment Protection by
                                        Intrinsic Safety ``i''.
UL 60079-15..........................  Explosive Atmospheres--Part 15:
                                        Equipment Protection by Type of
                                        Protection ``n''.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In this notice, OSHA also announces the addition of a new test
standard to the NRTL Program's List of Appropriate Test Standards.
Table 2, below, lists the test standard that is new to the NRTL
Program. OSHA has determined that this test standard is an appropriate
test standard and will include it in the NRTL Program's List of
Appropriate Test Standards.

   Table 2--Test Standard OSHA Is Adding to the NRTL Program's List of
                       Appropriate Test Standards
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Test standard                     Test standard title
------------------------------------------------------------------------
UL 60079-2...........................  Explosive Atmospheres--Part 2:
                                        Equipment Protection by
                                        Pressurized Enclosure ``p''.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OSHA's recognition of any NRTL for a particular test standard is
limited to equipment or materials for which OSHA standards require
third-party testing and certification before using them in the
workplace. Consequently, if a test standard also covers any products
for which OSHA does not require such testing and certification, an
NRTL's scope of recognition does not include these products.

    The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) may approve the
test standards listed above as American National Standards. However,
for convenience, we may use the designation of the standards-developing
organization for the standard as opposed to the ANSI designation. Under
the NRTL Program's policy (see OSHA Instruction CPL 1-0.3, Appendix C,
paragraph XIV), any NRTL recognized for a particular test standard may
use either the proprietary version of the test standard or the ANSI
version of that standard. Contact ANSI to determine whether a test
standard is currently ANSI-approved.

A. Conditions

    In addition to those conditions already required by 29 CFR 1910.7,
MET must abide by the following conditions of the recognition:
    1. MET must inform OSHA as soon as possible, in writing, of any
change of ownership, facilities, or key personnel, and of any major
change in its operations as a NRTL, and provide details of the
change(s);
    2. MET must meet all the terms of its recognition and comply with
all OSHA policies pertaining to this recognition; and
    3. MET must continue to meet the requirements for recognition,
including all previously published conditions on MET's scope of
recognition, in all areas for which it has recognition.
    Pursuant to the authority in 29 CFR 1910.7, OSHA hereby expands the
scope of recognition of MET, subject to the limitation and conditions
specified above.

III. Authority and Signature

    Dorothy Dougherty, Deputy 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 March 22, 2017.
Dorothy Dougherty,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2017-06765 Filed 4-4-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


[Federal Register: September 25, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 187)]
[Notices]
[Page 55572-55573]
[DOCID:fr25se08-91]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 28386; File No. 812-13576]

The Reserve Fund, on Behalf of Two of Its Series, the Primary
Fund and the U.S. Government Fund; Order Temporarily Suspending
Redemption of Investment Company Shares and Postponing Payment for
Investment Company Shares Which Have Been Submitted for Redemption for
Which Payment Has Not Been Made Pursuant to Section 22(E)(3) of the
Investment Company Act of 1940

September 22, 2008.
    The Reserve Fund (the ``Trust'' or the ``Applicant''), an open-end
management investment company registered with the Commission under the
Investment Company Act of 1940 (the ``Act''), has filed an application
on behalf of two of its series, the Primary Fund and the U.S.
Government Fund (the ``Funds''), for a temporary order pursuant to
section 22(e)(3) of the Act permitting (a) suspension of the right of
redemption of their outstanding redeemable securities, and (b)
postponement of payment for shares which have been submitted for
redemption for which payment has not been made.
    Section 22(e) of the Act provides, in relevant part, that no
registered investment company shall suspend the right of redemption, or
postpone the date of payment upon redemption except ``(3) for such * *
* periods as the Commission may by order permit for the protection of
security holders of the company.''
    Applicant represents that: (1) The board, including a majority of
directors that are not interested persons of the Trust: (a) Determined,
on September 17, 2008, that a suspension of redemption is in the best
interest of each Fund's shareholders, and (b) determined, on September
17, 2008, that a postponement of payment for shares which have been
submitted for redemption for which payment has not been made is in the
best interest of each Fund's shareholders, and (c) will create a plan
for the orderly liquidation of each Fund's assets to meet redemption
requests and for the appropriate payments to each Fund's shareholders,
including those whose redemption orders have been received but not yet
paid, which plan is subject to Commission supervision; (2) the Funds
have suspended sales; and (3) the Funds will make and keep appropriate
records surrounding these events.
    Based on the representations in the application, including those
relating to the current extraordinary market conditions, the Commission
finds that the temporary suspension of the right of redemption and
postponement of payment for shares which have been submitted for
redemption for which payment has not been made by the Funds is
necessary for the protection of their security holders.
    Accordingly, it is ordered, pursuant to section 22(e)(3) of the
Act, that the requested exemption from section 22(e) of the Act is
granted until the markets are liquid to a degree that enables each Fund
to liquidate portfolio securities without impairing the net asset value
of each Fund, or the Commission, on its own initiative, rescinds the
order granted herein. This order shall be in effect as of September 17,
2008.

    By the Commission.
Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-22547 Filed 9-24-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 109 (Wednesday, June 6, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26339-26340]
[FR Doc No: 2018-12158]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Bureau of Transportation Statistics

[Docket ID Number DOT-OST-2014-0031]

Agency Information Collection; Activity Under OMB Review;
Submission of Audit Reports--Part 248

AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology
(OST-R), Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS), Department of
Transportation.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this notice announces that the Information
Collection Request (ICR) abstracted below has been forwarded to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for extension of currently
approved collections. The ICR describes the nature of the information
collection and its expected burden. The Federal Register Notice with a
60-day comment period soliciting comments on the following collection
of information was published on March 28, 2018 (83 FR 13442). Four
comments were received. None pertained to this Information Collection
Request and will be addressed by the Department at this time.

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by July 6, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff Gorham, Office of Airline
Information, RTS-42, Room E34, OST-R, BTS, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590-0001, Telephone Number<PHONE_NUMBER>, Fax Number
(202) 366-3383 or email [email protected].
    Comments: Send comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725-17th Street NW,
Washington, DC 20503, Attention: OST Desk Officer.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    OMB Approval No. 2138-0004.
    Title: Submission of Audit Reports--Part 248.
    Form No.: None.
    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.
    Respondents: Large certificated air carriers.
    Number of Respondents: 60.
    Number of Responses: 60.
    Total Burden per Response: 15 minutes.
    Total Annual Burden: 15 hours.
    Needs and Uses: BTS collects independent audited financial reports
from U.S. certificated air carriers. Carriers not having an annual
audit must file a statement that no such audit has been performed. In
lieu of the audit report, BTS will accept the annual report submitted
to the stockholders. The audited reports are needed by the Department
of Transportation as: (1) A means to monitor an air carrier's
continuing fitness to operate; (2) reference material used by analysts
in examining foreign route cases; (3) reference material used by
analysts in examining proposed mergers, acquisitions and
consolidations; (4) a means whereby BTS sends a copy of the report to
the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) in fulfillment of
a United States treaty obligation; and, (5) corroboration of a
carrier's Form 41 filings.
    The Confidential Information Protection and Statistical Efficiency
Act of 2002 (44 U.S.C. 3501), requires a statistical agency to clearly
identify information it collects for non-statistical purposes. BTS
hereby notifies the respondents and the public that BTS uses the
information it collects under this OMB approval for non-statistical
purposes including, but not limited to, publication of both
Respondent's identity and its data, and submission of the information
to agencies outside BTS for review, analysis and possible use in
regulatory and other administrative matters.
    Comments are invited on: Whether the proposed collection of
information

is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the
Department concerning consumer protection. Comments should address
whether the information will have practical utility; the accuracy of
the Department's estimate of the burden of the proposed information
collection; ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the
information to be collected; and ways to minimize the burden of the
collection of information on respondents, including the use of
automated collection techniques or other forms of information
technology.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on May 31, 2018.
William Chadwick, Jr.,
Director, Office of Airline Information, Bureau of Transportation
Statistics.
[FR Doc. 2018-12158 Filed 6-5-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P


[Federal Register: December 12, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 237)]
[Notices]
[Page 73503-73506]
[DOCID:fr12de05-103]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-52891; File No. SR-NYSE-2005-83]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange, Inc.;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
and Amendment Nos. 1 and 2 Thereto Relating to Amendments to the
Exchange's Certificate of Incorporation, Constitution and Rules to
Allow Limited Liability Companies to Become Members and Related Changes
to the Exchange's 2005 Price List

December 5, 2005.
    Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on November 28, 2005, the New York Stock Exchange, Inc. (``NYSE'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. On December
1, 2005, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule
change.\3\ On December 5, 2005, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 2 to
the proposed rule change.\4\ The Exchange has designated this proposal
as ``non-controversial'' pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act,\5\
and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder,\6\ which renders the proposed rule
change effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change,
as amended, from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Form 19b-4 dated December 1, 2005 (``Amendment No. 1'').
In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange (i) modified the Purpose section to
match the proposed rule text; (ii) amended the proposed changes to
the Exchange Certificate of Incorporation and included a description
of such proposed changes in the Purpose section; and (iii) made
technical changes.
    \4\ See Partial Amendment dated December 5, 2005 (``Amendment
No. 2''). In Amendment No. 2, the Exchange (i) clarified the purpose
section to match the proposed rule text; (ii) made changes to the
Exchange's 2005 Price List; (iii) deleted a paragraph in Section III
of Exhibit 1; and (iv) made technical changes.
    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \6\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(1)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes (i) to amend the Exchange's Constitution to
allow limited liability companies (``LLCs'') to become members of the
Exchange, (ii) a related amendment to the Exchange's Certificate of
Incorporation, (iii) an amendment to Exchange Rule 301 to implement the
admission to membership of LLCs under certain limited circumstances in
order to facilitate estate planning by individual members, and (iv) an
amendment to the Exchange's 2005 Price List to reflect an application
fee to be charged to new LLC members and to waive the Exchange's
transfer fee payable in connection with the transfer of a leased seat,
if the new lease is entered into solely as a result of a transfer to an
LLC pursuant to proposed Exchange Rule 301(e). Under the proposed rule
change, transfers of LLC membership interests would be prohibited other
than transfers (i) to Family Members,\7\ (ii) to grantor retained
annuity trusts (``GRATs'') established for estate and tax planning
purposes, (iii) by distribution of such interest by the trustee of each
such a trust to any one or more of its beneficiaries (including a trust
for the benefit of any one or more of them), or (iv) by gift or
bequest, outright or in trust, by any such beneficiary, the donees and
legatees of any such beneficiary or their donees and legatees, in each
case subject to certain additional limitations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ For purposes of proposed Exchange Rule 301(e), the term
``Family Member'' means, with respect to any person, such person's
spouse, domestic partner, children, stepchildren, grandchildren,
parents, parents-in-law, grandparents, brothers, sisters, uncles,
aunts, cousins, nephews and nieces.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site (http://www.nyse.com), at the Exchange's Office of the

Secretary, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose

Amendment to Exchange Constitution and Certificate of Incorporation

    At the Exchange's annual membership meeting on April 7, 2005, the
members voted to amend the Exchange's Constitution to allow LLCs to be
members of the Exchange in order to facilitate estate planning by
individual members. The Exchange's Constitution currently restricts
membership to natural persons. This restriction has had the effect of
limiting members from being able to include memberships in estate
planning.
    The proposed amendment would allow members to place their seats
into LLCs, allowing them to advance estate-planning objectives. The
proposed amendment is also intended to prevent aggregation of control
through LLCs, to maximize accountability, and to facilitate regulation
and administration to the greatest extent possible.

    Under the proposed amendment, only individuals who are already NYSE
members would be permitted to form an LLC for the purpose of serving as
a member of the Exchange. The amendment would not allow a non-member to
form an LLC for the purpose of acquiring a membership.
    When the LLC is admitted as a NYSE member, it must be wholly owned
either by an individual who is a NYSE member or by the executor of his
or her estate, and the LLC must own nothing other than a single NYSE
membership, related membership revenues and, if applicable, contract
rights with approved lessees. The LLC's trading rights cannot be
exercised by anyone other than a lessee (who must be a broker-dealer or
associated with a broker-dealer) who has been approved by the NYSE.
    The death of the individual member who created the LLC would
entitle the individual's family to receive a payment from the Gratuity
Fund and will trigger an obligation among the other members to
contribute to the Gratuity Fund. Only when the LLC's membership is
again owned by an individual, and that individual passes away, would
there be a further obligation for the Gratuity Fund to make any
payments in respect of that membership. However, so long as the LLC
owns the membership, the LLC would be required to contribute to the
Gratuity Fund on the same terms as any other NYSE member, except that a
limited transfer member (as defined below) would not have to make any
contribution to the Gratuity Fund upon the death of the limited
transferor (as defined below) from whom the limited transfer member
received its membership.
    LLCs admitted as NYSE members would be subject to such additional
limitations as the Exchange's Board of Directors may impose by rule.
    At the Exchange's 2005 annual members' meeting, the membership also
voted to make conforming amendments to the Exchange's Certificate of
Incorporation. The proposed amendments to the Exchange's Certificate of
Incorporation would permit ownership of Exchange memberships by persons
other than natural persons, provided such persons are permitted to own
memberships under the Exchange's Constitution and rules. The proposed
amendments to the Exchange's Certificate of Incorporation are being
made to enable LLCs to be members of the Exchange and would also permit
the Exchange in the future to amend its Constitution and Rules to
create other classes of membership without any further amendment to its
Certificate of Incorporation. The proposed amendments do not eliminate
or limit in any way the possible existence of electronic access members
or annual members having physical access to the floor.

Implementing Rules

    Many Exchange members have asked the Exchange's Board of Directors
and management to amend the Exchange's Rules in light of the
Constitutional authority the members granted the Exchange's Board at
the 2005 annual members' meeting to permit the transfer of seats to
LLCs. The desire to transfer seats to LLCs for estate and tax planning
purposes has been greatly enhanced by the Exchange's execution of a
merger agreement with Archipelago Holdings, Inc., upon consummation of
which membership interests in the Exchange will be exchanged for shares
of a new publicly traded holding company, NYSE Group, Inc. Anticipating
that the value of memberships could increase substantially if and as
various merger uncertainties are resolved favorably--including the
votes on December 6, 2005 of the Exchange members and the Archipelago
shareholders, and approval of the transaction by the Division of Market
Regulation--members are anxious for the Exchange to make the necessary
rule changes as quickly as possible, to allow the transfers to be made
before the full appreciation is reflected in the market price of
membership interests.
    Proposed Exchange Rule 301(e) would implement the amendment to the
Constitution with respect to a narrow category of LLCs. Under the
proposed rule change, transfers of LLC membership interests will be
prohibited other than transfers (i) to Family Members,\8\ (ii) to GRATs
established for estate and tax planning purposes, (iii) by distribution
of such interest by the trustee of each such a trust to any one or more
of its beneficiaries (including a trust for the benefit of any one or
more of them), or (iv) by gift or bequest, outright or in trust, by any
such beneficiary, the donees and legatees of any such beneficiary or
their donees and legatees, in each case subject to certain additional
limitations. The proposed rule is designed to provide members with
increased estate and tax planning options. The Exchange believes that
it achieves a reasonable balance between the Exchange's interest in
providing members with the flexibility to plan their estates and the
Exchange's interest in regulating and protecting its membership. The
proposed rule would impose certain additional restrictions and
limitations on the member LLCs and would give the Exchange authority
with respect to transfer of ownership interests in the member LLCs. The
provisions of the proposed rule include the following:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See supra note 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (a) A requirement that the Exchange approve any member LLC and its
governing documents, as well as the dissolution of any member LLC and
any amendments to LLC governing documents;
    (b) A prohibition against any transfer of Exchange membership by
any member LLC (other than an indirect transfer by reason of the
transfer of interests in the LLC permitted under (e) below) except with
the prior written approval of the Exchange;
    (c) A prohibition against any member LLC holding any asset other
than a single Exchange membership, related revenues and, if applicable,
contract rights with an approved lessee;
    (d) A prohibition against transfer of interests in any member LLC
which transfer creates or changes ``control interests'' in the LLC
except with Exchange approval;
    (e) Prohibition against any transfer of any equity, voting or
ownership interest in the company other than a transfer (A) by bequest
or lifetime gift by the Limited Transferor \9\ to any one or more of
the Limited Transferor's Family Members (provided that no such Family
Member transferee shall have a veto right with respect to the removal
or replacement of the manager by the owner of the majority in interest
of the company or any matters pertaining to any Reorganization \10\),
(B) by lifetime gift by the Limited Transferor to one or more Qualified
Trusts,\11\ each of which has not more than one Trustee and is governed
by a trust instrument that has been certified to the Exchange by
authorized legal counsel of the Limited Transferor to contain the
provisions that

would cause the trust held under the instrument, if the instrument were
duly executed, to be at the time of initial funding a grantor retained
annuity trust, or GRAT, in which the Limited Transferor, commonly known
as the grantor, retains a qualified interest as defined in section
2702(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, (C) by
distribution of such interest by the Trustee of each such trust to any
one or more of its beneficiaries (including a trust for the benefit of
any one or more of them), or (D) by gift or bequest, outright or in
trust, by any such beneficiary, the donees and legatees of any such
beneficiary or their donees and legatees;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ For purposes of proposed Exchange Rule 301(e), the term
``Limited Transferor'' shall mean the individual who was the
Exchange member who initially contributed his or her membership to
the company, thereby causing it to become a limited transfer member
of the Exchange within the meaning of its Constitution.
    \10\ For purposes of proposed Exchange Rule 301(e), the term
``Reorganization'' shall mean any merger of the Exchange (or any
successor entity) with, or any sale of all or substantially all of
the assets of the Exchange (or any successor entity) to, another
entity, such that any entity other than the Exchange shall either
directly or indirectly hold a majority of the equity of the Exchange
or all or substantially all of the assets of the Exchange. For the
avoidance of doubt, a Reorganization shall include the Exchange's
merger with Archipelago Holdings, Inc.
    \11\ The term ``Qualified Trust'' shall mean a trust solely for
the benefit of the Limited Transferor and/or the Limited
Transferor's Family Members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (f) A prohibition against any transfer of member LLC interests, if
such transfer would result in any individual, corporation, partnership,
company, or trust owning, directly or indirectly, a controlling
interest (as ``control'' is described under Exchange Rule 2, taking
into account equity, voting or ownership interests owned by fiduciaries
only to the extent they are acting as trustee of a trust created by a
Family Member or the estate fiduciary of an individual who was a family
member) if (i) the transferee is a member of the Exchange or (ii)
following such transfer, the transferee would own, directly or
indirectly, controlling interests in more than three LLCs that are
limited transfer members of the Exchange;
    (g) A prohibition against any member LLC having more than one
manager or permitting any person other than the manager to take actions
on behalf of the LLC;
    (h) Qualifications for member LLC managers;
    (i) No liability of the NYSE in connection with member LLCs and a
requirement that member LLCs (and persons holding interests in member
LLCs) indemnify the NYSE with respect to claims; and
    (j) An application to become a limited transfer member shall be
subject to the posting and payment requirements provided in Exchange
Rule 301(d) and .26 and .27 of the Supplementary Materials to Exchange
Rule 301, except that no more than five days need elapse between the
posting of a notice of a proposed transfer to a proposed limited
transfer member under proposed Exchange Rule 301(e) and the
consideration thereof rather than the ten days provided in Exchange
Rule 301(d) and .26 of the Supplementary Materials to Exchange Rule
301.
    The restrictions and limitations included in the proposed rule are
intended to give the Exchange broad controls with respect to members
that are not individuals while accommodating members' planning
objectives.

LLC Application Fees

    Currently, the Exchange charges an application fee in the amount of
$2,500 to membership applicants who are not associated with members or
member organizations.\12\ It is proposed that the Exchange's Board of
Directors establish an application fee in the amount of $5,000 in view
of the additional costs to the Exchange in connection with memberships
held by LLCs. The proposed LLC application fee would be in lieu of the
$2,500 application fee referred to in the first sentence of this
paragraph. The proposed LLC application fee, like the $2,500
application fee payable in other cases, is in addition to the
initiation fee payable by new members.\13\ Fees payable in connection
with transfers to an LLC are separate from, and in addition to, fees
payable in connection with the acquisition of a membership by the
person who transfers his or her membership to the LLC, and fees payable
in connection with any lease of membership.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Exchange 2005 Price List page 9, ``Registration and
Regulatory Fees,'' for the $2,500 fee charged to non-public
organizations and individuals.
    \13\ The Exchange 2005 Price List and .27 of the Supplementary
Material to Exchange Rule 301 set forth a transfer fee for purchased
and leased seats of 5% of the purchase price or the last contracted
sale, subject to a minimum of $1,000 and a maximum of $5,000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange will waive its transfer fee of up to $5,000 payable in
connection with the transfer of a leased seat, if the new lease is
entered into solely as a result of a transfer to an LLC pursuant to
proposed Exchange Rule 301(e).
2. Statutory Basis
    The proposed changes are consistent with sections 6(b)(4) \14\ and
6(b)(5) \15\ of the Act, in that they provide for the equitable
allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among the
Exchange's members, and they are 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 and are not
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

    The Exchange has neither solicited nor received written comments on
the proposed rule change. The proposed rule change is being made in
response to requests received from a large number of Exchange members.
The staff of the Exchange has worked with interested members and their
legal advisors to draft a proposed rule that will accommodate members
in pursuing their estate and tax planning objectives.

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

    Because the foregoing rule change: (1) Does not significantly
affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (2) does not
impose any significant burden on competition; and (3) does not become
operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such
shorter time as the Commission may designate, the proposed rule change
has become effective pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \16\
and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \17\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). The Exchange provided the
Commission with written notice of the Exchange's intent to file the
proposed rule change at least five business days prior to the filing
date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \18\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing.
However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) permits the Commission to designate a
shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest. The Exchange has requested that the
Commission waive the 30-day operative delay, as specified in Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii), and designate the proposed rule change immediately
operative.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public
interest.\19\ The Commission notes that the proposed rule would impose
certain restrictions

and limitations on the LLCs and would give the Exchange authority with
respect to transfer of ownership interests in the LLCs. For instance,
the trading rights associated with the membership transferred to the
LLC cannot be exercised by anyone other than a lessee to whom the LLC
has leased its membership (such lessee must be approved by the
Exchange, pursuant to the Exchange's current requirements for
lessees).\20\ The Commission further notes that other exchanges permit
entities as well as individuals to own memberships. The Commission
believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay achieves a reasonable
balance between the Exchange's interest in providing members with the
flexibility to establish LLCs as soon as possible for estate and tax
planning purposes and preserving the Exchange's interest in regulating
and protecting its membership.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \20\ See proposed Article II, Section 15(b) of the Exchange's
Constitution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission may summarily abrogate 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.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ For purposes of calculating the 60-day period within which
the Commission may summarily abrogate the proposed rule change under
section 19(b)(3)(C) of the Act, the Commission considers the period
to commence on December 5, 2005, the date the Exchange filed
Amendment No. 2 to the proposed rule change. See 15 U.S.C.
78s(c)(3)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml.
); or     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-NYSE-2005-83 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-9303.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2005-83. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,

all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of the
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted
without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to
File Number SR-NYSE-2005-83 and should be submitted on or before
January 3, 2006.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E5-7196 Filed 12-9-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register: November 29, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 228)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 73015-73016]
[DOCID:fr29no10-34]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0938; Airspace Docket No. 10-ANE-108]

Proposed Amendment of Class E Airspace; Newport, VT

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend Class E Airspace at Newport, VT,
as the Newport Non-Directional Beacon (NDB) has been decommissioned and
new Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) have been developed
at Newport State Airport. This action would enhance the safety and
airspace management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations at the
airport.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC. Comments must be received on or before
January 13, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this rule to: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001;
Telephone: 1-800-647-5527; Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify the
Docket Number FAA-2010-0938; Airspace Docket No. 10-ANE-108, at the
beginning of your comments. You may also submit and review received
comments through the Internet at http:[sol][sol]www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Melinda Giddens, Operations Support
Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, P.O.
Box 20636, Atlanta, Georgia 30320; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested persons are invited to comment on this rule by
submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as they may desire.
Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the views and
suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing reasoned
regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are specifically invited
on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and
energy-related aspects of the proposal.
    Communications should identify both docket numbers (FAA Docket No.
FAA-2010-0938; Airspace Docket No. 10-ANE-108) and be submitted in
triplicate to the Docket Management System (see ADDRESSES section for
address and phone number). You may also submit comments through the
Internet at http:[sol][sol]www.regulations.gov.
    Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
on this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed stamped
postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket
No. FAA-2010-0938; Airspace Docket No. 10-ANE-108.'' The postcard will
be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received before the specified closing date for
comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule.
The proposal contained in this notice may be changed in light of the
comments received. A report summarizing each substantive public contact
with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded from and
comments submitted through http:[sol][sol]www.regulations.gov. Recently
published rulemaking documents can also be accessed through the FAA's
Web page at http:[sol][sol]www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_
traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see the ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between
9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. An
informal docket may also be examined during normal business hours at
the office of the Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation
Administration, room 210, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, Georgia
30337.

    Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future
NPRMs should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking,<PHONE_NUMBER>, to
request a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application
procedure.

The Proposal

    The FAA is considering an amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 to amend Class E airspace extending upward
from 700 feet above the surface for new SIAPs developed at Newport
State Airport, Newport, VT. Airspace reconfiguration is necessary due
to the decommissioning of the Newport NDB and cancellation of the NDB
approach. Controlled airspace is necessary for the safety and
management of IFR operations.
    Class E airspace designations are published in Paragraph 6005 of
FAA order 7400.9U, dated August 18, 2010, and effective September 15,
2010, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designation listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.
    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore, (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that
will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this proposed rule, when promulgated, would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This proposed rulemaking is promulgated under the authority
described in subtitle VII, part A, subpart I, section 40103. Under that
section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the
use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the
efficient use of airspace. This proposed regulation is within the scope
of that authority as it would amend Class E airspace at Newport State
Airport, Newport, VT.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (Air).

The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9U, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 18, 2010, effective September 15, 2010,
is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

ANE VT E5 Newport, VT [AMENDED]

Newport State Airport, VT
    (Lat. 44[deg]53'20'' N., long. 72[deg]13'45'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.4-mile radius of the Newport State Airport and within 1.8
miles each side of the 159[deg] bearing from the airport extending
from the 6.4-mile radius to 10.9 miles south of Newport State
Airport.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on November 16, 2010.
Mark D. Ward,
Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air Traffic
Organization.
[FR Doc. 2010-29898 Filed 11-26-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 46 (Thursday, March 9, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14663-14664]
[FR Doc No: 2023-04785]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 34845; File No. 812-15325]

PGIM Private Real Estate Fund, Inc., et al.

March 3, 2023.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'' or ``SEC'').

ACTION: Notice.

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

    Notice of application for an order (``Order'') under sections 17(d)
and 57(i) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the ``Act'') and rule
17d-1 under the Act to permit certain joint transactions otherwise
prohibited by sections 17(d) and 57(a)(4) of the Act and rule 17d-1
under the Act.

Summary of Application:  Applicants request an order to permit certain
business development companies (``BDCs'') and closed-end management
investment companies to co-invest in portfolio companies with each
other and with certain affiliated investment entities.

Applicants:  PGIM Private Real Estate Fund, Inc., PGIM, Inc., PGIM
Investments LLC, PGIM Private Credit Fund, PGIM Real Estate U.S. Core
Debt Fund, L.P., PGIM Real Estate U.S. Debt Fund LP, PGIM Real Estate
U.S. Impact Value Partners LP, PGIM Retirement Real Estate Fund II LP,
PRISA LP, PRISA II LP, PRISA III Fund LP, Senior Housing Partnership
Fund VI LP, PGIM Senior Loan Opportunities (Levered) I, L.P., PGIM
Senior Loan Opportunities I, L.P., PGIM Senior Loan Opportunities
(Parallel Fund) I, L.P., PSLO I US Investors Levered Debt SPV LLC, PGIM
US Investors/Non-US Senior Debt Levered I Fund, PGIM US Investors/Non-
US Senior Debt Levered I Supplemental Fund, PGIM Senior Loan
Opportunities Management Fund I, L.P., PGIM US Investors/Non-US Senior
Debt I Fund, PGIM Senior Debt I Management Fund, PGIM Senior Loan
Opportunities I Co-Investment II, L.P., PGIM Non-US Investors/Non-US
Senior Debt I Fund A, PGIM Non-US Investors/US Senior Debt I Fund A,
PGIM Senior Loan Opportunities I Co-Investment I, L.P., PGIM Senior
Loan Opportunities (Parallel Fund) II, L.P., PGIM Non-US Investors/US
Senior Debt I Fund, PGIM Non-US Investors/Non-US Senior Debt I Fund,
PGIM Private Capital Fund (Ireland) ICAV, Private Placement Trust
Investors, LLC, PGIM Global Investors/Global Senior Debt II Fund,
PRIVEST, PRIVEST PLUS, PGIM Infrastructure Debt Fund, Gibraltar
Universal Life Reinsurance Company, PRUCO Life Insurance Company, PRUCO
Life Insurance Company of New Jersey, Prudential Annuities Life
Assurance Corporation, Prudential Arizona Reinsurance Captive Company,
Prudential Arizona Reinsurance Term Company, Prudential Arizona
Reinsurance Universal Company, Prudential Legacy Insurance Company of
New Jersey, Prudential Term Reinsurance Company, Prudential Universal
Reinsurance Company, Universal Prudential Arizona Reinsurance Company,
PAR U Hartford Life& Annuity Comfort Trust, PAR U Hartford Life
Insurance Comfort Trust, PICA Hartford Life& Accident Comfort Trust,
PICA Hartford Life& Annuity Comfort Trust, PICA Hartford Life Insurance
Comfort Trust, PRUCO Reinsurance Ltd., The Gibraltar Life Insurance
Co.,Ltd., The Prudential Life Insurance Company,Ltd., Gibraltar
Reinsurance Company Ltd., PGIM Warehouse,Inc., Dryden Arizona
Reinsurance Term Company, Lotus Reinsurance Company Ltd., The
Prudential Insurance Company of America.

Filing Dates:  The application was filed on April 22, 2022, and amended
on November 1, 2022 and February 3, 2023.

Hearing or Notification of Hearing:  An order granting the requested
relief will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing.
Interested persons may request a hearing on any application by emailing
the SEC's Secretary at [email protected] and serving the
Applicants with a copy of the request by email, if an email address is
listed for the relevant Applicant below, or personally or by mail, if a
physical address is listed for the relevant Applicant below.
    Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by 5:30 p.m.
on March 28, 2023, and should be accompanied by proof of service on

applicants, in the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a certificate
of service. Pursuant to rule 0-5 under the Act, hearing requests should
state the nature of the writer's interest, any facts bearing upon the
desirability of a hearing on the matter, the reason for the request,
and the issues contested. Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing
may request notification by emailing the Commission's Secretary at
[email protected].

ADDRESSES: The Commission: [email protected]. Applicants:
Claudia DiGiacomo, [email protected]; Benjamin C. Wells,
[email protected]; Ryan P. Brizek, [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephan N. Packs, Senior Counsel, or
Terri G. Jordan, Branch Chief, at<PHONE_NUMBER> (Division of
Investment Management, Chief Counsel's Office).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For Applicants' representations, legal
analysis, and conditions, please refer to Applicants' second amended
and restated application, dated February 3, 2023, which may be obtained
via the Commission's website by searching for the file number at the
top of this document, or for an Applicant using the Company name search
field, on the SEC's EDGAR system. The SEC's EDGAR system may be
searched at http://www.sec.gov/edgar/searchedgar/legacy/companysearch.html. You may also call the SEC's Public Reference Room
at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
under delegated authority.
Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-04785 Filed 3-8-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation on February 25, 2005

   NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-2003-14508

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Application of US AIRWAYS, INC. filed 1/7/05 for:

XX  Renewal of exemption for two years under 49 U.S.C. 40109 to provide
the following service:

Scheduled foreign air transportation of property and mail between a
point or points in the United States and a point or points in Taiwan.
US Airways intends to operate this service pursuant to a code-share
arrangement with United Air Lines, Inc.

Applicant rep:   Howard Kass<PHONE_NUMBER>     DOT Analyst:  Thuy H.
Cooper<PHONE_NUMBER>

D I S P O S I T I O N

XX  Granted (subject to conditions, see below)

The above action was effective when taken: February 25, 2005, through
February 25, 2007.

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director

		      Office of International Aviation

XX   The authority granted is consistent with the aviation agreement
between the American Institute in Taiwan and the Taipei Economic &
Cultural Representative’s Office.

Except to the extent exempted or waived, this authority is subject to
the terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:

XX  Holder’s certificate of public convenience and necessity

		XX  Standard Exemption Conditions (attached)

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________

On the basis of data officially noticeable under Rule 24(g) of the
Department’s regulations, we found the applicant qualified to provide
the services authorized.

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (2) grant of the application was consistent with the public
interest; and (3) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.
To the extent not granted, we denied all requests in the referenced
Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority granted in this
Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR
§385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date
of issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and
the filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at: http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.aspU.S. Carrier
Exemption Conditions

In the conduct of the operations authorized, the U.S. carrier
applicant(s) shall:

(1)  Hold at all times effective operating authority from the government
of each country served;

(2)  Comply with applicable requirements concerning oversales contained
in 14 CFR 250 (for scheduled operations, if authorized);

(3)  Comply with the requirements for reporting data contained in 14 CFR
241;

(4)  Comply with requirements for minimum insurance coverage, and for
certifying that coverage to the Department, contained in 14 CFR 205;

(5)  Except as specifically exempted or otherwise provided for in a
Department Order, comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 203, concerning
waiver of Warsaw Convention liability limits and defenses;

(6)  Comply with all applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration and with all applicable U.S. Government requirements
concerning security, including, but not limited to, 49 CFR Part 1544.
To assure compliance with all applicable U.S. Government requirements
concerning security, the holder shall, before commencing any new service
(including charter flights) to or from a foreign airport, contact its
International Principal Security Inspector (IPSI) to advise the IPSI of
its plans and to find out whether the Transportation Security
Administration has determined that security is adequate to allow such
airport(s) to be served; and

(7)  Comply with such other reasonable terms, conditions, and
limitations required by the public interest as may be prescribed by the
Department of Transportation, with all applicable orders and regulations
of other U.S. agencies and courts, and with all applicable laws of the
United States.

The authority granted shall be effective only during the period when the
holder is in compliance with the conditions imposed above.

05/2004

 US Airways states that it is not
curre瑮祬瀠潲楶楤杮挠摯ⵥ桳牡湩敳癲捩潴吠楡慷
Ɱ戠瑵眠獩敨⁳潴洠楡瑮楡桴汦硥扩汩瑩⁹潴漠晦
牥猠捵敳癲捩獥മ


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 173 (Monday, September 8, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 53248]
[FR Doc No: 2014-21392]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[File No. 500-1]

In the Matter of Asia Cork, Inc., Biocurex, Inc., Carthew Bay
Technologies Inc., Current Technology Corp., Gamecorp Ltd. (n/k/a
DealNet Capital Corp.), Globetech Ventures Corp., and Pepper Rock
Resources Corp.; Order of Suspension of Trading

September 4, 2014.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Asia Cork, 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
Biocurex, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic reports since the
period ended September 30, 2012.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Carthew Bay Technologies 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
Current Technology Corp. because it has not filed any periodic reports
since the period ended September 30, 2009.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Gamecorp Ltd. (n/k/a DealNet Capital Corp.) because it has not filed
any periodic reports since the period ended September 30, 2009.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Globetech Ventures Corp. because it has not filed any periodic reports
since the period ended September 30, 2010.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Pepper Rock Resources Corp. because it has not filed any periodic
reports since the period ended April 30, 2011.
    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 September 4, 2014, through 11:59
p.m. EDT on September 17, 2014.

    By the Commission.
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-21392 Filed 9-4-14; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P