----- Original Message -----

From: "Chiang, Amy"<EMAIL_ADDRESS> Sent: 05/25/2010 11:54 AM MST

To: Tom Land<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Drusilla Hufford; Cindy Newberg

Subject: Apollo Announcement

Just wanted to give you a heads up in case you didn't see it...

Honeywell will begin supplying commercial quantities of a new

refrigerant - HFO-1234yf - in the fourth quarter of 2011.

SUMMARY ON RELEASE:

Honeywell and DuPont announced a manufacturing joint venture to produce

the HFO-1234yf refrigerant for use in automotive air conditioning

systems.  The new refrigerant has a lower global warming potential (GWP)

of 4.

Honeywell and DuPont introduced HFO-1234yf to the automotive industry in

2007, and since then, it has undergone extensive testing for safety and

efficacy by independent testing groups such as the Society of Automotive

Engineers International Cooperative Research Program, in which leading

automobile manufacturers participated.

Attached please find a copy of the press release outlining the

manufacturing joint venture.


moderate credit risk; or (ii) if they are less seasoned securities,
subject to a minimal or low amount of credit risk.\120\ The proposed
amendments to rule 206(3)-3T would impose a new compliance requirement
in connection with advisers' obligations relating to written policies
and procedures under rule 206(4)-7 under the Advisers Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \119\ Proposed rule 5b-3(c)(1)(iv)(C).
    \120\ Proposed rule 10f-3(a)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Small entities registered with the Commission as investment
companies or investment advisers seeking to rely on each of the rules
as it is proposed to be amended would be subject to the same
requirements as larger entities. With respect to rule 206(3)-3T, in
each case, however, an investment adviser, whether large or small,
would only be able to rely on the rule as it is proposed to be amended
if it also is registered with us as a broker-dealer. As noted above, we
estimate that 19 small entities are advisers that are also registered
as broker-dealers and therefore only those small entities are eligible
to rely on the rule. In developing the requirements of the proposed
amendments to each of rules 5b-3 and 10f-3 under the Investment Company
Act, and rule 206(3)-3T under the Investment Advisers Act, we
considered the extent to which the proposed amendments would have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.

    We encourage written comments regarding this analysis. We solicit
comments as to whether the proposed amendments could have any effect
that we have not considered. We also request that commenters describe
the nature of any impact on small entities and provide empirical data
to support the extent of the impact.

F. Duplicative, Overlapping, or Conflicting Federal Rules

    Rule 31a-1 under the Act requires the retention of ledger accounts
for each portfolio security and each person through which a portfolio
transaction is effected. Although some of the procedures under the
proposed amendments to rules 5b-3 and 10f-3 may overlap with
information in the ledgers, the rule 5b-3 and 10f-3 procedures would
contain additional information specifically related to the concerns
underlying these rules.
    The Commission believes that there are no rules that duplicate or
conflict with the proposed amendments to rule 206(3)-3T.

G. Significant Alternatives

    The RFA directs us to consider significant alternatives that would
accomplish our stated objective, while minimizing any significant
adverse impact on small entities. Alternatives in this category would
include: (i) Establishing different compliance or reporting standards
or timetables that take into account the resources available to small
entities; (ii) clarifying, consolidating, or simplifying compliance
requirements under the rule for small entities; (iii) using performance
rather than design standards; and (iv) exempting small entities from
coverage of the rule, or any part of the rule.
    With respect to rules 5b-3 and 10f-3, the Commission preliminarily
believes that special compliance requirements or timetables for small
entities, or an exemption from coverage for small entities, may create
a risk that those entities could acquire repurchase agreements with
collateral that may not retain its market value or liquidity in the
event of a counterparty default. We do not expect that the requirement
that refunded securities be certified by a certified public accountant
would result in any costs or burdens for either small or large
entities. With respect to rule 10f-3, we preliminarily believe that
special compliance requirements or timetables for small entities, or an
exemption from coverage for small entities, may put those entities at
greater risk for purchasing unmarketable municipal securities in an
affiliated underwriting. We preliminarily believe, therefore, that it
is important for the credit quality and liquidity considerations
required by the proposed amendments to rules 5b-3 and 10f-3 to apply to
all funds relying on the rules, not just those that are not considered
small entities. Further consolidation or simplification of the
proposals for funds that are small entities would be inconsistent with
the Commission's goals of fostering investor protection.
    With respect to rule 206(3)-3T, the Commission preliminarily
believes that special compliance or reporting requirements or
timetables for small entities, or an exemption from coverage for small
entities may create the risk that the investors who are advised by and
effect securities transactions in underwritten securities through such
small entities may not receive adequate protection combined with access
to securities. We believe, therefore, that it is important for the
investment quality consideration required by the proposed amendments to
apply to all advisers, not just those that are not considered small
entities. Further consolidation or simplification of the proposals for
investment advisers that are small entities would be inconsistent with
the Commission's goals of fostering investor protection.
    We have endeavored through the proposed amendments to rules 5b-3,
10f-3 and 206(3)-3T to minimize the regulatory burden on all entities
eligible to rely on the respective rules, including small entities,
while meeting our regulatory objectives. It was our goal to ensure that
eligible small entities may benefit from the Commission's approach to
the proposed amendments to the same degree as other funds or eligible
advisers, as appropriate.
    We request comment on whether it is feasible or necessary for small
entities to have special requirements or timetables for, or exemptions
from, compliance with the proposed amendments to each of the rules. In
particular, could any of the proposed amendments be altered in order to
ease the regulatory burden on small entities, without sacrificing the
effectiveness of the proposed amendments?

H. Request for Comments

    We encourage the submission of comments with respect to any aspect
of this IRFA. In particular, we request comments regarding: (i) The
number of small entities that may be affected by the proposed
amendments; (ii) the existence or nature of the potential impact of the
proposed amendments on small entities discussed in the analysis; and
(iii) how to quantify the impact of the proposed amendments. Commenters
are asked to describe the nature of any impact and provide empirical
data supporting the extent of the impact. Such comments will be
considered in the preparation of the Final Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis, if the proposed amendments are adopted, and will be placed in
the same public file as comments on the proposed amendments. Comments
should be submitted to the Commission at the addresses previously
indicated.

X. Statutory Authority

    The Commission is proposing amendments to rules 2a-7, 3a-7, and 5b-
3 under the authority set forth in sections 6(c) and 38(a) of the
Investment Company Act [15 U.S.C. 80a-6(c), 80a-37(a)]. The Commission
is proposing amendments to rule 10f-3 under the authority set forth in
sections 10(f), 31(a) and 38(a) of the Investment Company Act [15
U.S.C. 80a-10(f), 80a-30(a), 80a-37(a)]. The Commission is proposing
amendments to rule 206(3)-(3)T under the authority set forth in
sections 206A and 211(a) of the Investment Advisers Act [15 U.S.C. 80b-
6A, 80b-11(a)].

List of Subjects

17 CFR Part 270

    Investment companies, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Securities.

17 CFR Part 275

    Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Securities.

Text of Proposed Rule Amendments

    For reasons set out in the preamble, Title 17, Chapter II of the
Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 270--RULES AND REGULATIONS, INVESTMENT COMPANY ACT OF 1940

    1. The authority citation for part 270 continues to read in part as
follows:

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 80a-1 et seq., 80a-34(d), 80a-37, and 80a-
39, unless otherwise noted.
* * * * *
    2. Section 270.2a-7 is amended by:
    a. Revising paragraphs (a)(10), (a)(12), and (a)(17);
    b. Removing paragraph (a)(19);
    c. Redesignating paragraph (a)(20) as paragraph (a)(19);
    d. Removing paragraph (a)(21);
    e. Redesignating paragraphs (a)(22) through (a)(27) as paragraphs
(a)(20) through (a)(25);
    f. Removing paragraph (a)(28);
    g. Redesignating paragraph (a)(29) as paragraph (a)(26);

    h. In paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2), revising the phrase ``(c)(2),
(c)(3), and (c)(4)'' to read ``(c)(2), (c)(3), (c)(4), and (c)(5)'';
    i. Revising paragraphs (c)(3)(i), (c)(3)(iii), and (c)(3)(iv)(C);
    j. Adding paragraph (c)(3)(iv)(D);
     k. In paragraph (c)(4)(v), revising the phrase ``requirements of
paragraphs (c)(4) and (c)(5)'' to read ``requirements of paragraphs
(c)(4) and (c)(6)'';
    l. Redesignating paragraphs (c)(5) through (c)(10) as paragraphs
(c)(6) through (c)(11);
    m. Adding new paragraph (c)(5);
    n. In newly redesignated paragraph (c)(6), revising the phrase
``(pursuant to paragraphs (c)(9)(ii) and (c)(10)(vi) of this section)''
to read ``(pursuant to paragraphs (c)(10)(ii) and (c)(11)(vi) of this
section)'';
    o. In newly redesignated paragraph (c)(7):
    i. revising the paragraph heading;
    ii. revising paragraph (i);
    iii. in the introductory text of paragraph (ii), revising the
phrase ``paragraphs (c)(6)(ii)(A) through (D)'' to read ``paragraphs
(c)(7)(ii)(A) through (C)'';
    iv. adding ``or'' at the end of paragraph (ii)(B);
    v. removing paragraph (ii)(C) and redesignating paragraph (ii)(D)
as paragraph (ii)(C);
    vi. revising paragraph (iii);
    vii. revising the heading to paragraph (iv); and
    viii. in paragraph (iv), revising the phrase ``For purposes of
paragraphs (c)(6)(ii) and (iii)'' to read ``For purposes of paragraphs
(c)(7)(ii) and (iii)'';
    p. Revising newly designated paragraph (c)(10)(ii);
    q. In newly redesignated paragraph (c)(11):
    i. in paragraph (i), revising the phrase ``paragraphs (c)(6)
through (c)(9)'' to read ``paragraphs (c)(7) through (c)(10)'';
    ii. revising paragraph (iii);
    iii. in paragraph (iv), revising the phrase ``paragraph (c)(9)(iii)
of this section'' to read ``paragraph (c)(10)(iii) of this section'';
    iv. in the introductory text of paragraph (v), in the first
sentence, revising ``paragraph (c)(9)(iv) of this section'' to read
``paragraph (c)(10)(iv) of this section'';
    v. in paragraph (vi), revising the phrase ``paragraph (c)(9)(ii)''
to read ``paragraph (c)(10)(ii)'';
    vi. in paragraph (vii), in the first sentence, revising the phrase
``this paragraph (c)(10)'' to read ``this paragraph (c)(11)''; and
    vii. in paragraph (vii), in the second sentence, revising the
phrase ``paragraphs (c)(6)(ii) (with respect to defaulted securities
and events of insolvency) or (c)(7)(ii)'' to read ``paragraphs
(c)(7)(ii) (with respect to defaulted securities and events of
insolvency) or (c)(8)(ii)''; and
    r. Revising the introductory text of paragraph (e) and in paragraph
(e)(2) revising the phrase ``paragraph (c)(6)(iii) of this section'' to
read ``paragraph (c)(7)(iii) of this section''.
    These additions and revisions read as follows:

Sec.  270.2a-7  Money market funds.

    (a) * * *
    (10) Eligible Security means a security with a remaining maturity
of 397 calendar days or less that the fund's board of directors
determines presents minimal credit risks (which determination must be
based on factors pertaining to credit quality and the issuer's ability
to meet its short-term financial obligations).
* * * * *
    (12) First Tier Security means a security the issuer of which the
fund's board of directors has determined has the highest capacity to
meet its short-term financial obligations.
* * * * *
    (17) Liquid Security means a security that can be sold or disposed
of in the ordinary course of business within seven days at
approximately the value ascribed to it by the money market fund.
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (i) General. The money market fund shall limit its portfolio
investments to those United States Dollar-Denominated securities that
are at the time of Acquisition Eligible Securities.
* * * * *
    (iii) Securities Subject to Guarantees. A security that is subject
to a Guarantee may be determined to be an Eligible Security or a First
Tier Security based solely on whether the Guarantee is an Eligible
Security or First Tier Security, as the case may be; Provided, however,
that the issuer of the Guarantee, or another institution, has
undertaken to promptly notify the holder of the security in the event
the Guarantee is substituted with another Guarantee (if such
substitution is permissible under the terms of the Guarantee).
    (iv) * * *
    (C) The issuer of the Demand Feature, or another institution, has
undertaken to promptly notify the holder of the security in the event
the Demand Feature is substituted with another Demand Feature (if such
substitution is permissible under the terms of the Demand Feature); and
    (D) The fund's board of directors determines that the Underlying
Security or any Guarantee of such security presents minimal credit
risks (which determination must be based on factors pertaining to
credit quality).
* * * * *
    (5) Portfolio Liquidity. The money market fund shall hold
securities that are sufficiently liquid to meet reasonably foreseeable
shareholder redemptions in light of the fund's obligations under
section 22(e) of the Act (15 U.S.C. 80a-22(e)) and any commitments it
has made to shareholders; Provided, however, immediately after the
Acquisition of any security, a money market fund shall not have
invested more than ten percent of its Total Assets in securities that
are not Liquid Securities.
* * * * *
    (7) Monitoring, Defaults and Other Events.
    (i) Monitoring. In the event the money market fund's investment
adviser (or any person to whom the fund's board of directors has
delegated portfolio management responsibilities) becomes aware of any
information about a portfolio security or an issuer of a portfolio
security that may suggest that the security may not continue to present
minimal credit risks, the board of directors shall reassess promptly
whether such security continues to present minimal credit risks and
shall cause the fund to take such action as the board of directors
determines is in the best interests of the money market fund and its
shareholders.
* * * * *
    (iii) Notice to the Commission. The money market fund shall
promptly notify the Commission by electronic mail directed to the
Director of the Division of Investment Management of any:
    (A) Default with respect to one or more portfolio securities (other
than an immaterial default unrelated to the financial condition of the
issuer) or an Event of Insolvency with respect to the issuer of the
security or any Demand Feature or Guarantee to which it is subject,
where immediately before default the securities (or the securities
subject to the Demand Feature or Guarantee) accounted for \1/2\ of 1
percent or more of a money market fund's Total Assets, of such fact and
the actions the money market fund intends to take in response to such
situation; or
    (B) Purchase of a security from the fund by an affiliated person or
promoter of or principal underwriter for the fund

or an affiliated person of such a person in reliance on Sec.  270.17a-
9.
* * * * *
    (iv) Defaults for Purposes of Paragraphs (c)(7) (ii) and (iii).* *
*
* * * * *
    (10) * * *
    (ii) Securities Subject to Demand Features or Guarantees. In the
case of a security subject to one or more Demand Features or Guarantees
that the fund's board of directors has determined that the fund is not
relying on to determine the quality (pursuant to paragraph (c)(3) of
this section), maturity (pursuant to paragraph (d) of this section) or
liquidity (pursuant to paragraph (c)(5) of this section) of the
security subject to the Demand Feature or Guarantee, written procedures
shall require periodic evaluation of such determination.
* * * * *
    (11) * * *
    (iii) Credit Risk Analysis. For a period of not less than three
years from the date that the credit risks of a portfolio security were
most recently reviewed, a written record of the determination that a
portfolio security presents minimal credit risks used to determine the
status of the security as an Eligible Security shall be maintained and
preserved in an easily accessible place.
* * * * *
    (e) Delegation. The money market fund's board of directors may
delegate to the fund's investment adviser or officers the
responsibility to make any determination required to be made by the
board of directors under this section (other than the determinations
required by paragraphs (c)(1) (board findings); (c)(7)(ii) (defaults
and other events); (c)(8)(i) (general required procedures: Amortized
Cost Method); (c)(8)(ii)(A) (shadow pricing), (B) (prompt consideration
of deviation), and (C) (material dilution or unfair results); and
(c)(9) (required procedures: Penny Rounding Method) of this section)
provided:
* * * * *
    3. Section 270.3a-7 is amended by:
    a. Revising paragraph (a)(2) introductory text;
    b. In paragraph (a)(2)(i) revising the phrase ``Any fixed-income
securities may be sold'' to read ``Any fixed-income securities sold'';
    c. In paragraph (a)(2)(ii), revising the phrase ``Any securities
may be sold'' to read ``Any securities sold'';
    d. In the undesignated paragraph after paragraph (a)(2)(ii), revise
the phrase ``persons specified in paragraphs (a)(2) (i) and (ii) of
this section'' to read ``persons specified in this section'';
     e. Revising paragraph (a)(3)(ii); and
    f. Revising paragraph (a)(4)(iii).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  270.3a-7  Issuers of asset-backed securities.

    (a) * * *
    (2) Securities sold by the issuer or any underwriter thereof are:
* * * * *
    (3) * * *
    (ii) The issuer has procedures to ensure that the acquisition or
disposition does not adversely affect the full and timely payment of
the outstanding fixed-income securities; and
* * * * *
    (4) * * *
    (iii) Takes actions necessary for the cash flows derived from
eligible assets for the benefit of the holders of fixed-income
securities to be deposited periodically in a segregated account
consistent with the full and timely payment of the outstanding fixed-
income securities.
* * * * *
    4. Section 270.5b-3 is amended by:
    a. Adding ``or'' at the end of paragraph (c)(1)(iv)(B);
    b. Revising paragraph (c)(1)(iv)(C);
    c. Removing paragraph (c)(1)(iv)(D);
    d. Revising paragraph (c)(4)(iii);
    e. Removing paragraphs (c)(5), (c)(6), and (c)(8); and
    f. Redesignating paragraph (c)(7) as paragraph (c)(5).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  270.5b-3  Acquisition of repurchase agreement or refunded
security treated as acquisition of underlying securities.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (iv) * * *
    (C) Securities that the investment company's board of directors, or
its delegate, determines at the time the repurchase agreement is
entered into:
    (1 ) Are sufficiently liquid that they can be sold at or near their
carrying value within a reasonably short period of time;
    (2) Are subject to no greater than minimal credit risk; and
    (3) The issuer of which has the highest capacity to meet its
financial obligations; and
* * * * *
    (4) * * *
    (iii) At the time the deposited securities are placed in the escrow
account, or at the time a substitution of the deposited securities is
made, an independent certified public accountant has certified to the
escrow agent that the deposited securities will satisfy all scheduled
payments of principal, interest and applicable premiums on the Refunded
Securities.
* * * * *
    5. Section 270.10f-3 is amended by:
    a. Revising paragraph (a)(3);
    b. Removing paragraph (a)(5); and
    c. Redesignating paragraphs (a)(6), (a)(7), and (a)(8) as
paragraphs (a)(5), (a)(6), and (a)(7).
    The revision reads as follows:

Sec.  270.10f-3  Exemption for the acquisition of securities during the
existence of an underwriting or selling syndicate.

    (a) * * *
    (3) Eligible Municipal Securities means ``municipal securities,''
as defined in section 3(a)(29) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(15 U.S.C. 78c(a)(29)), that are sufficiently liquid that they can be
sold at or near their carrying value within a reasonably short period
of time and either:
    (i) Are subject to no greater than moderate credit risk; or
    (ii) If the issuer of the municipal securities, or the entity
supplying the revenues or other payments from which the issue is to be
paid, has been in continuous operation for less than three years,
including the operation of any predecessors, the securities are subject
to a minimal or low amount of credit risk.
* * * * *

PART 275--RULES AND REGULATIONS, INVESTMENT ADVISERS ACT OF 1940

    6. The authority citation for part 275 continues to read in part as
follows:

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 80b-2(a)(11)(G), 80b-2(a)(17), 80b-3, 80b-
4, 80b-4a, 80b-6(4), 80b-6a, and 80b-11, unless otherwise noted.

* * * * *
    7. Section 275.206(3)-3T is amended by revising paragraph (c) to
read as follows:

Sec.  275.206(3)-3T  Temporary rule for principal trades with certain
advisory clients.

* * * * *
    (c) For purposes of paragraph (a)(2) of this section, an investment
grade debt security means a non-convertible debt security that, at the
time of sale, the investment adviser has determined to be subject to no
greater than moderate credit risk and sufficiently liquid that it can
be sold at or near its carrying value within a reasonably short period
of time.
* * * * *

    By the Commission.
    Dated: July 1, 2008.
Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-15282 Filed 7-10-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 229 (Wednesday, November 27, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 70954]
[FR Doc No: 2013-28435]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0001]

Risk Communications Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

    This notice announces a forthcoming meeting of a public advisory
committee of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The meeting will
be open to the public.
    Name of Committee: Risk Communications Advisory Committee.
    General Function of the Committee: To provide advice and
recommendations to the Agency on FDA's regulatory issues.
    Date and Time: The meeting will be held on December 17, 2013, from
9 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Location: FDA White Oak Campus, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 31
Conference Center, the Great Room (rm. 1503), Silver Spring, MD 20993.
Information regarding special accommodations due to a disability,
visitor parking, and transportation may be accessed at: http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm; under the heading
``Resources for You,'' click on ``Public Meetings at the FDA White Oak
Campus.'' Please note that visitors to the White Oak Campus must enter
through Building 1.
    Contact Person: Luis G. Bravo, Office of Planning, Food and Drug
Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 32, Rm. 3274, 240-402-
5274, or FDA Advisory Committee Information Line, 1-800-741-8138 (301-
443-0572 in the Washington, DC area). A notice in the Federal Register
about last minute modifications that impact a previously announced
advisory committee meeting cannot always be published quickly enough to
provide timely notice. Therefore, you should always check the Agency's
Web site at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm and
scroll down to the appropriate advisory committee meeting link, or call
the advisory committee information line to learn about possible
modifications before coming to the meeting.
    If you are unable to join us in person, we encourage you to watch
the free Webcast. Visit the Risk Communication Advisory Committee Web
site at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMaterials/RiskCommunicationAdvisoryCommittee/default.htm. The link will become active shortly before the open
session begins at 9 a.m.
    Agenda: On December 17, 2013, the Committee will meet to identify
and discuss new methods for communicating risk information as part of
Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (REMS) to health care
providers. The discussion will also address how sponsors and FDA can
evaluate whether REMS communications are reaching the targeted
population, are increasing awareness and understanding of the key risk
messages, as well as whether the communications are having the intended
impact on knowledge, behaviors, and/or outcomes.
    FDA intends to make background material available to the public no
later than 2 business days before the meeting. If FDA is unable to post
the background material on its Web site prior to the meeting, the
background material will be made publicly available at the location of
the advisory committee meeting, and the background material will be
posted on FDA's Web site after the meeting. Background material is
available at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/Calendar/default.htm. Scroll down to the appropriate advisory committee meeting
link.
    Procedure: Interested persons may present data, information, or
views, orally or in writing, on issues pending before the committee.
Written submissions may be made to the contact person on or before
December 10, 2013. Oral presentations from the public will be scheduled
between approximately 1 p.m. and 2 p.m. Those individuals interested in
making formal oral presentations should notify the contact person and
submit a brief statement of the general nature of the evidence or
arguments they wish to present, the names and addresses of proposed
participants, and an indication of the approximate time requested to
make their presentation on or before December 2, 2013. Time allotted
for each presentation may be limited. If the number of registrants
requesting to speak is greater than can be reasonably accommodated
during the scheduled open public hearing session, FDA may conduct a
lottery to determine the speakers for the scheduled open public hearing
session. The contact person will notify interested persons regarding
their request to speak by December 3, 2013.
    Persons attending FDA's advisory committee meetings are advised
that the Agency is not responsible for providing access to electrical
outlets.
    FDA welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee
meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with
physical disabilities or special needs. If you require special
accommodations due to a disability, please contact Luis G. Bravo at
least 7 days in advance of the meeting.
    FDA is committed to the orderly conduct of its advisory committee
meetings. Please visit our Web site at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm111462.htm for procedures
on public conduct during advisory committee meetings.
Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory Committee
Act (5 U.S.C. app. 2).

    Dated: November 21, 2013.
Jill Hartzler Warner,
Acting Associate Commissioner for Special Medical Programs.
[FR Doc. 2013-28435 Filed 11-26-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 157 (Tuesday, August 16, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 50278-50280]
[FR Doc No: 2022-17458]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2022-0058]
RIN 1625-AA87

Security Zone; Port of Miami, Florida

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing to change the existing Port of
Miami fixed security zone regulation that encompasses certain navigable
waters of the Miami Main Channel in Miami, FL. The proposed change is
designed to extend the existing security zone eastward. The extension
is needed to include future cruise ship terminals at the Port of Miami.
This proposed action would extend the existing fixed security zone
approximately 840 yards eastward along the Miami Main Channel. We
invite your comments on this proposed rulemaking.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before September 15, 2022.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2022-0058 using the Federal Decision Making Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public Participation and Request for
Comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further
instructions on submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
proposed rulemaking, call or email LTJG Ben Adrien, Waterways
Management Division Chief, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

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

II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis

    On January 23, 2003, the Coast Guard published a final rule
entitled, ``Security Zones; Port of Palm Beach, Port Everglades, Port
of Miami, and Port of Key West, Florida'' in the Federal Register \1\
to protect the public, ports, and waterways of the Port of Palm Beah,
Port Everglades, and the Port of Miami, against potential subversive
acts. The existing fixed security zone described in 33 CFR
165.760(b)(2), for the Port of Miami, encompasses all waters between
Watson Island and Star Island from the MacArthur Causeway south to Port
of Miami. The Port of Miami is undergoing an expansion project that
will create new cruise ship terminals at the eastern end of the Port
and outside the existing security zone.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 68 FR 3189.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule would make changes to the existing fixed security
zone for the Port of Miami, described in Sec.  165.760(b)(2), by
extending the zone by approximately 840 yards eastward along the Miami
Main Channel to just west of the Biscayne Bay Pilots Station. This
proposed change is intended to protect the public, ports and waterways
of the Port of Miami against potential subversive acts The Coast Guard
is proposing this rulemaking under authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034.

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Coast Guard is proposing to extend the existing Port of Miami
fixed security zone eastward approximately 840 yards. The extension
would cover all navigable waters in the Main Ship Channel from
approximately Star Island to just west of the Biscayne Bay Pilots
Station. The extension would carry the same regulations described in
Sec.  165.760, which goes into effect when two or more passenger
vessels, vessels carrying cargoes of particular hazard, or vessels
carrying liquefied hazardous gas (LHG), enter or moor within this zone.
When the security zone is in effect, persons and vessels would not be
allowed to enter or transit the security zone along the Miami Main
Channel, unless authorized by Captain of the Port of Miami or a
designated representative. The regulatory text we are proposing appears
at the end of this document.

IV. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed 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. This NPRM has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM
has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
    This regulatory action determination is based on three specific
factors: (1) persons and vessels may transit the Miami Main Channel
when only one passenger vessel is berthed in the channel, one vessel
carrying cargoes of particular hazard is berthed in the channel, or one
vessel carrying LHG is berthed in the channel; (2) persons and vessels
may operate within the security zone when authorized by Captain of the
Port of Miami or a designated representative; and (3) mariners will be
notified of the fixed security zone extension through the Local Notice
to Mainers.

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
proposed rule would 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 proposed rule would not have a significant economic
impact on any vessel owner or operator.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this proposed rule
would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment
(see ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to
what degree this proposed rule would economically affect it.
    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 proposed rule. If the proposed rule
would affect your small business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or
options for compliance, please call or email the person listed in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. The Coast Guard will not
retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this
proposed rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would 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 proposed 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 proposed 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 proposed rule has implications for federalism or
Indian tribes, please call or email 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 proposed rule would not
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the potential effects of
this proposed rule elsewhere in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing
instructions, 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 preliminary 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 proposed rule involves increasing
the size of an existing security zone along the Miami Main Channel.
Such actions are categorically excluded from further review under
paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-
01-001-01, Rev. 1. A preliminary Record of Environmental Consideration
supporting this determination is available in the docket. For
instructions on locating the docket, see the ADDRESSES section of this
preamble. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed
rule.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to call or email 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.

V. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking,
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation.
    Submitting comments. We encourage you to submit comments through
the Federal Decision Making Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. To
do so, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2022-0058 in the
search box and click ``Search.'' Next, look for this document in the
Search Results column, and click on it. Then click on the Comment
option. If you cannot submit your material by using https://www.regulations.gov, call or email the person in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this proposed rule for alternate
instructions.
    Viewing material in docket. To view documents mentioned in this
proposed rule as being available in the docket, find the docket as
described in the previous paragraph, and then select ``Supporting &
Related Material'' in the Document Type column. Public comments will
also be placed in our online docket and can be viewed by following
instructions on the https://www.regulations.gov Frequently Asked
Questions web page. We review all comments received, but we will only
post comments that address the topic of the proposed rule. We may
choose not to post off-topic, inappropriate, or duplicate comments that
we receive.
    Personal information. We accept anonymous comments. Comments we
post to https://www.regulations.gov will include any personal
information you have provided. For more about privacy and submissions
to the docket in response to this document, see DHS's eRulemaking
System of Records notice (85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020).

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine Safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and Record
keeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard is
proposing to amend 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.
00170.1, Revision No. 01.2.

0
2. In Sec.  165.760, revise paragraph (b)(2) to read as follows:

Sec.  165.760  Security Zones; Port of Palm Beach, Port Everglades, and
Port of Miami, Florida.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) Fixed security zone in Port of Miami, Florida. A fixed security
zone encompassing all navigable waters within the Miami Main Channel
between Star Island to just west of the Biscayne Bay Pilots Station.
The security zone is formed by an imaginary line starting at the
northwest corner in position 25[deg]46.33' N, 080[deg]09.16' W; thence
in an easterly direction to the northeast corner in position
25[deg]46.17' N, 080[deg]08.77' W; thence in a southerly direction to
the southeast corner in position 25[deg]46.04' N, 080[deg]08.75' W;
thence in a northwesterly direction to the southwest corner in position
25[deg]46.23' N, 080[deg]09.16' W, thence in a northerly direction back
to the northwest corner.
    (i) When the security zone is in effect, persons and vessels shall
not enter or transit the security zone along the Miami Main Channel
unless authorized by Captain of the Port of Miami or a designated
representative.
    (ii) Persons and vessels may transit the Miami Main Channel when
only one passenger vessel is berthed in the channel, one vessel
carrying cargoes of particular hazard is berthed in the channel, or one
vessel carrying LHG is berthed in the channel.
    (iii) Law enforcement vessels can be contacted on VHF Marine Band
Radio, Channel 16 (156.8 MHz).
* * * * *

    Dated: August 2, 2022.
C.R. Cederholm,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Miami.
[FR Doc. 2022-17458 Filed 8-15-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 156 (Monday, August 13, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 48138]
[FR Doc No: 2012-19780]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. EG12-63-000; EG12-64-000; EG12-65-000; EG12-66-000; EG12-
67-000; EG12-68-000; EG12-69-000]

Topaz Solar Farms LLC; High Plains Ranch II, LLC; Bethel Wind
Energy LLC; Rippey Wind Energy LLC; Pacific Wind, LLC; Colorado
Highlands Wind, LLC; Shooting Star Wind Project, LLC; Notice of
Effectiveness of Exempt Wholesale Generator or Foreign Utility Company
Status

    Take notice that during the month of May 2012, the status of the
above-captioned entities as Exempt Wholesale Generators became
effective by operation of the Commission's regulations. 18 CFR
366.7(a).

    Dated: August 6, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-19780 Filed 8-10-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: April 6, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 66)]
[Notices]
[Page 17502-17503]
[DOCID:fr06ap06-105]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. IC-27277]

Notice of Applications for Deregistration Under Section 8(f) of
the Investment Company Act of 1940

March 31, 2006.
    The following is a notice of applications for deregistration under
section 8(f) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 for the month of
March 2006. A copy of each application may be obtained for a fee at the
SEC's Public Reference Branch (tel.<PHONE_NUMBER>). An order granting
each application will be issued unless the SEC orders a hearing.
Interested persons may request a hearing on any application by writing
to the SEC's Secretary at the address below and serving the relevant
applicant with a copy of the request, personally or by mail. Hearing
requests should be received by the SEC by 5:30 p.m. on April 25, 2006,
and should be accompanied by proof of service on the applicant, in the
form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a certificate of service. Hearing
requests should state the nature of the writer's interest, the reason
for the request, and the issues contested. Persons who wish to be
notified of a hearing may request notification by writing to the
Secretary, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Diane L. Titus at<PHONE_NUMBER>, SEC,
Division of Investment Management, Office of Investment Company
Regulation, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-4041.

Noah Investment Group, Inc. [File No. 811-8058]

    Summary: Applicant seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to
be an investment company. On June 10, 2005, applicant transferred its
assets to Timothy Plan Large/Mid-Cap Growth Fund, a series of the
Timothy Plan, based on net asset value. Expenses of $15,525 incurred in
connection with the reorganization were paid by Polestar Management
Company, Inc., applicant's investment adviser.
    Filing Date: The application was filed on March 13, 2006.
    Applicant's Address: 975 Delchester Rd., Newton Square, PA 19073.

Opus Investment Trust [File No. 811-21214]

    Summary: Applicant seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to
be an investment company. On January 26, 2006, applicant made a
liquidating distribution to its shareholders, based on net asset value.
Expenses of approximately $1,840 incurred in connection with the
liquidation were paid by applicant.
    Filing Dates: The application was filed on February 13, 2006, and
amended on March 16, 2006.
    Applicant's Address: 440 Lincoln St., Worcester, MA 01653.

Progressive Capital Accumulation Trust [File No. 811-972]

    Summary: Applicant seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to
be an investment company. Applicant has never made a public offering of
its securities and does not propose to make a public offering.
Applicant will continue to operate as a private investment company in
reliance on section 3(c)(1) of the Act.
    Filing Dates: The application was filed on February 10, 2006, and
amended on March 14, 2006.
    Applicant's Address: 579 Pleasant St., Suite 4, Paxton, MA 01612.

Franklin Floating Rate Trust [File No. 811-8271]

    Summary: Applicant, a closed-end investment company, seeks an order
declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. On June 2,
2005, applicant transferred its assets to Franklin Floating Rate Daily
Access Fund, a series of Franklin Investors Securities Trust, based on
net asset value. Expenses of $356,674 incurred in connection with the
reorganization were paid by applicant, the acquiring fund and Franklin
Advisers, Inc., investment adviser for applicant and the acquiring
fund.
    Filing Date: The application was filed on February 22, 2006.
    Applicant's Address: One Franklin Parkway, San Mateo, CA 94403-
1906.

Franklin Multi-Income Trust [File No. 811-5873]

    Summary: Applicant, a closed-end investment company, seeks an order
declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. On July 21,
2005, applicant's outstanding senior notes were prepaid in full in
accordance with the terms of its senior note agreement. On August 4,
2005, applicant transferred its assets to Franklin Income Fund, a
series of Franklin Custodian Funds, Inc., based on net asset value.
Expenses of $104,915 incurred in connection with the reorganization
were paid by applicant, the acquiring fund and Franklin Advisers, Inc.,
investment adviser for applicant and the acquiring fund.
    Filing Date: The application was filed on February 22, 2006.
    Applicant's Address: One Franklin Parkway, San Mateo, CA 94403-
1906.

First Trust Advantage Series 1 and Subsequent Series [File No. 811-
2749]

    Summary: Applicant, a unit investment trust, seeks an order
declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. On July 21,
2004, applicant made a final liquidating distribution to its
unitholders, based on net asset value. Applicant incurred no expenses
in connection with the liquidation.

    Filing Date: The application was filed on March 1, 2006.
    Applicant's Address: First Trust Portfolios, L.P., 1001 Warrenville
Rd., Suite 300, Lisle, IL 60532.

Muni California Intermediate Duration Fund, Inc. [File No. 811-21347]

    Summary: Applicant, a closed-end investment company, seeks an order
declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. Applicant has
never made a public offering of its securities and does not propose to
make a public offering or engage in business of any kind.
    Filing Dates: The application was filed on January 3, 2006, and
amended on March 8, 2006.
    Applicant's Address: 800 Scudders Mill Rd., Plainsboro, NJ 08543-
9011.

Global Capital and Income Strategies Fund, Inc. [File No. 811-21578]

    Summary: Applicant, a closed-end investment company, seeks an order
declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. Applicant has
never made a public offering of its securities and does not propose to
make a public offering or engage in business of any kind.
    Filing Dates: The application was filed on January 3, 2006, and
amended on March 8, 2006.
    Applicant's Address: 800 Scudders Mill Rd., Plainsboro, NJ 08543-
9011.

Fidelity Government Securities Fund [File No. 811-2869]

    Summary: Applicant seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to
be an investment company. On November 28, 1997, applicant transferred
its assets to a corresponding series of the Fidelity Income Fund, based
on net asset value. Expenses of approximately $12,000 incurred in
connection with the reorganization were paid by applicant.
    Filing Dates: The application was filed on November 30, 2005, and
amended on February 22, 2006.
    Applicant's Address: 82 Devonshire St., Boston, MA 02109.

Hillview Investment Trust II [File No. 811-9901]

    Summary: Applicant seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to
be an investment company. On November 25, 2005, applicant made a
liquidating distribution to its shareholders, based on net asset value.
Expenses of $3,000 incurred in connection with the liquidation were
paid by applicant and Hillview Capital Advisors, LLC, applicant's
investment adviser.
    Filing Dates: The application was filed on January 25, 2006, and
amended on March 3, 2006.
    Applicant's Address: c/o PFPC Inc., 400 Bellevue Parkway,
Wilmington, DE 19809.

TD Waterhouse Trust [File No. 811-9519]

    Summary: Applicant seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to
be an investment company. On July 8, 2005, applicant's six series
transferred their assets to corresponding series of T. Rowe Price Index
Trust, Inc., T. Rowe Price International Index Fund, Inc., or T. Rowe
Price U.S. Bond Index Fund, Inc., based on net asset value. Expenses of
$534,576 incurred in connection with the reorganization were paid by TD
Waterhouse Investor Services, Inc., an affiliate of applicant's
investment adviser.
    Filing Dates: The application was filed on November 29, 2005, and
amended on March 6, 2006.
    Applicant's Address: 100 Wall St., New York, NY 10005.

Variable Life Account C of ING Life Insurance and Annuity Company [File
No. 811-9665]

    Summary: Applicant seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to
be an investment company. Prior to April 30, 2003, each existing group
life certificate was surrendered and the amount of insurance in effect
was converted to a substantially comparable flexible premium general
account life insurance policy. Expenses of $4,000 incurred in
connection with the liquidation were paid by ING Life Insurance and
Annuity Company.
    Filing Dates: The application was filed on February 6, 2006 and
amended on March 13, 2006.
    Applicant's Address: 151 Farmington Avenue, Hartford, CT 06156.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
pursuant to delegated authority.
Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-5006 Filed 4-5-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 [ EPA R03 OAR 2005 0480; FRL ]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; West Virginia; Redesignation of the City of Weirton PM 10 Nonattainment Area to Attainment and Approval of the Maintenance Plan AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is approving a redesignation request and a State Implementation Plan ( SIP)

revision submitted by the State of West Virginia. This revision requests that EPA redesignate the Weirton nonattainment area ( Weirton Area) to attainment for the national ambient air quality standards ( NAAQS) for particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 10 micrometers ( PM 10), and concurrently requests approval of a limited maintenance plan ( LMP) as a revision to the West Virginia State Implementation ( SIP). In this action, EPA is approving the State's request to redesignate the area from nonattainment to attainment, as well as approving the LMP for the Weirton Area.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule is effective on [ insert date 30 days from date of publication].

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID Number EPAR03 OAR 2005 0480. All documents in the docket are listed in the www. regulations. gov website. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically through www. regulations. gov or in hard copy for public inspection during normal business hours at the 2 Air Protection Division, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street,

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State submittal are available at the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Air Quality, 601 57th Street SE,

Charleston, WV 25304.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Linda Miller, ( 215) 814 2068, or by e mail at miller. linda@ epa. gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background On May 11, 2006 ( 71 FR 27440), EPA published a notice of proposed rulemaking ( NPR) for the State of West Virginia. The NPR proposed approval of the LMP for the Weirton Area in West Virginia and the State's request to redesignate the area from nonattainment to attainment. EPA also proposed to determine that, because the Weirton Area has continued to attain the PM 10 NAAQS, certain attainment demonstration requirements, along with other related requirements of the CAA, are not applicable to the Weirton Area. West Virginia submitted a request to redesignate the Weirton Area to attainment for PM 10 and a SIP submittal for the related maintenance plan on May 24, 2004.

. II. Summary of SIP Revision On May 16, 2001 ( 66 FR 27034), EPA promulgated a final rule entitled, " Determination of Attainment of the NAAQS for PM 10 in the Weirton, West Virginia Nonattainment Area" finding that the Weirton PM 10 nonattainment had attained the NAAQS for PM 10 by its applicable December 31, 2000 attainment date. In order to be redesignated from nonattainment to 3 attainment, West Virginia requested, in a letter dated October 14, 2003, that EPA apply its clean data policy to the Weirton Area. The redesignation request, dated May 24, 2004, included the associated SIP submittal of the maintenance plan for the Weirton area.

Other specific requirements of the request for redesignation and the associated rationale and the rationale for EPA's proposed action are explained in the NPR and will not be restated here. EPA received one comment in support of the proposed approval.

III. Final Action EPA is approving the PM 10 redesignation request for the Weirton Area, and also approving the associated limited maintenance plan as a revision to the West Virginia SIP.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews A. General Requirements Under Executive Order 12866 ( 58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is not a " significant regulatory action" and therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, " Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use" ( 66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act ( 5 U. S. C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule approves pre existing requirements under state law and does not impose any additional 4 enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 ( Public Law 104 4). This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will 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, as specified by Executive Order 13175 ( 65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 ( 64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999).

This action merely approves a state rule implementing a Federal requirement, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act.

This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 AProtection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks@ ( 62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.

In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA= s role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State to use voluntary consensus standards ( VCS), EPA has no authority to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA,

when it reviews a SIP submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements of section 12( d) of the 5 National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 ( 15 U. S. C. 272 note) do not apply.

This rule does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 ( 44 U. S. C. 3501 et seq.).

B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General The Congressional Review Act, 5 U. S. C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the U. S. Senate, the U. S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This rule is not a Amajor rule@ as defined by 5 U. S. C. 804( 2). 6 C. Petitions for Judicial Review Under section 307( b)( 1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action to approve the redesignation request for the Weirton nonattainment area and approve the associated maintenance plan as a revision to the SIP must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by [ insert date 60 days from date of publication of this document in the Federal Register]. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. ( See section 307( b)( 2).)

List of Subjects 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and Recordkeeping requirements, Particulate matter.

40 CFR Part 81 Air Pollution Control, National parks, Wilderness areas ___________________________ Dated: July 6, 2006 William T. Wisniewski, Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 7 40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 are amended as follows:

PART 52  [ AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for 40 CFR part 52 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U. S. C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart XX B West Virginia 2. In ' 52.2520, the table in paragraph ( e) is amended by adding an entry for the City of Weirton PM 10 Maintenance Plan at the end of the table to read as follows:

' 52.2520 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

( e)* * *

Name of nonregulatory SIP revision Applicable geographic area State submittal date EPA approval date Additional explanation * * * * * * *

City of Weirton PM 10 Maintenance Plan Hancock and Brooke Counties ( part) the City of Weirton 4/ 24/ 04 [ Insert Federal Register publication date] [ Insert page number where the document begins] Limited maintenance plan 8 PART 81  [ AMENDED]

Subpart C  Section 107 Attainment Status Designations 1. The authority citation for Part 81 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U. S. C. 7401 et seq.

2. In ' 81.349, the table for AWest Virginia   PM 10" is amended by revising the entry for Hancock and Brooke Counties ( part): The City of Weirton to read as follows:

' 81.349 West Virginia * * * * *

West Virginia  PM 10 Designation Classification Designated Area Date Type Date Type * * * * * * *

Hancock and Brooke Counties ( part):

The City of Weirton [ Insert 60 Days after publication date] Attainment * * * * * * *

* * * * *


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 103 (Wednesday, May 31, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 24859-24860]
[FR Doc No: 2017-11222]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R01-OAR-2017-0158; A-1-FRL-9961-72-Region 1]

Adequacy Status of Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for
Transportation Conformity Purposes; CT

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice of adequacy.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is notifying the
public that it has found that the 2017 motor vehicle emission budgets
for the Greater Connecticut ozone nonattainment area for the 2008
national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) for ozone are adequate
for transportation conformity purposes. As a result of our finding,
Connecticut must use these motor vehicle emissions budgets for future
transportation conformity determinations. These budgets were contained
in the January 17, 2017 attainment demonstration State Implementation
Plan (SIP) for the Greater Connecticut ozone nonattainment area for the
2008 ozone NAAQS.

DATES: This finding is effective June 15, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ariel Garcia, Air Quality Planning
Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Region 1 Regional
Office, 5 Post Office Square, Suite 100 (mail code: OEP05-2), Boston,
MA 02109-3912, telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax number (617) 918-
0660, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' ``us,'' or ``our'' is
used, we mean EPA.
    Today's action is simply an announcement of a finding that we have
already made. EPA Region 1 sent a letter to the Connecticut Department
of Energy and Environmental Protection (CT DEEP) on March 20, 2017
stating that the 2017 motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) for the
Greater Connecticut nonattainment area for the 2008 ozone NAAQS are
adequate. CT DEEP submitted the budgets on January 17, 2017, as part of
its attainment demonstration SIP for the Greater Connecticut
nonattainment area for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. This submittal was
announced on EPA's conformity Web site, and received no comments. (See
https://www.epa.gov/state-and-local-transportation/adequacy-review-state-implementation-plan-sip-submissions-conformity. Once there, click
on ``What SIP submissions are currently under EPA adequacy review?'')
    The 2017 MVEBs, in tons per summer day (tpsd), for volatile organic
compounds (VOC) and oxides of nitrogen (NOX) for Greater
Connecticut, are as follows:

 2017 Adequate Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets Greater Connecticut Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             NOX (tpsd)
                                               VOC (tpsd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 2017...................................         15.9          22.2
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Transportation conformity is required by section 176(c) of the
Clean Air Act. EPA's conformity rule requires that transportation
plans, programs, and projects conform to state air quality
implementation plans and establishes criteria and procedures for
determining whether or not they do. Conformity to a SIP means that
transportation activities will not produce new air quality violations,
worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of the national
ambient air quality standards.
    The criteria by which we determine whether a SIP's motor vehicle
emissions budgets are adequate for transportation conformity purposes
are outlined in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). We have described our process for
determining the adequacy of submitted SIP budgets in our July 1, 2004,
conformity final rule preamble starting at 69 FR 40038, and we used the
information in these resources while making our adequacy determination.
Please note that an adequacy review is separate from EPA's completeness
review, and it also should not be used to prejudge EPA's ultimate
approval of the SIP. Even if we find a budget adequate, the SIP could
later be disapproved.
    Connecticut's January 17, 2017 SIP revision also includes 2017
MVEBs for the Connecticut portion of the New York-Northern New Jersey-
Long Island, NY-NJ-CT (Southwest Connecticut) nonattainment area for
the 2008 ozone NAAQS. However, we are not able to evaluate the budgets
for the Southwest Connecticut nonattainment area at this time since
Connecticut DEEP has not yet submitted its reasonable further progress
and attainment demonstration SIPs for this area. EPA will not take
action, nor make an adequacy determination, on MVEBs for the 2008 ozone
standard for the Southwest Connecticut nonattainment area, until a SIP
revision meeting the requirements for reasonable further progress or an
attainment demonstration is submitted for that nonattainment area.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

    Dated: April 10, 2017.
Deborah A. Szaro,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA New England.
[FR Doc. 2017-11222 Filed 5-30-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


Date:

Thursday, September 14, 2006 01:51PM

Subject:

Re: More fill-in the blank -- DNA screening - field sampling for analysis and ha conversation rates for sterile releases

From:

  HYPERLINK "javascript:noop()" \o "Create new mail memo with this address"  Bruce Tabashnik<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

To:

cc:

  HYPERLINK "javascript:noop()" \o "Create new mail memo with this address"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>,   HYPERLINK "javascript:noop()" \o "Create new mail memo with this address"  Bob Staten<EMAIL_ADDRESS>,   HYPERLINK "javascript:noop()" \o "Create new mail memo with this address"<EMAIL_ADDRESS> bcc:

Sharlene,

To convert to ha multiply acres X 2.47 because there are 2.47 acres per ha.

So 20 steriles/Bt acre = 49.4 steriles per Bt ha.

100 steriles per non-Bt acre = 247 steriles per non-Bt ha.

It's best to keep "per day" separate from "per release."

The latest information I have on releases is the following, based on a conversation with Bob Staten (8-25-06):

Non-Bt cotton, 3 releases per week (1 release per 2.3 days)

Mean to date = 251 moths per acre per release (621 per ha per release)

251 moths per acre per release X 3 releases per week = 753 moths per acre per week

753 moths per acre per week divided by 7 days per week = 108 moths per acre per day

Bt cotton, 3 releases per week (1 release per 3 days)

Mean to date = 53.1 moths per acre per release (131 per ha per release)

53.1 moths per acre per release X 3 releases per week = 159.3 moths per acre per week

159.3 moths per acre per week divided by 7 days per week = 22.8 moths per acre per day

If non-Bt = 7% of acreage, Bt =  93% of acreage, 108 X 0.07 + 22.8 X 0.93 = 7.56 + 21.2 =

actual mean release rate = 28.8 moths per acre (71.1 per ha) per day

Note:  Production of 70 million moths per week /165,000 acres of cotton = 420 moths per acre per week = potential mean release rate = 60 moths per acre per day (estimated mean is half of this)

Should have more info for you later today on PCR sampling, I don't have "suspect site" info.

Bruce


From:
"Ulatowski, Rhiannon"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sent:
Mon, 12 Sep 2022 14:13:13
To:
"Jones; DonnaLee"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"Zavoda; Rich"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"Kistler; Katie E"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"Maicher; Thomas W."<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"Beranek; Rob"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"Long; Michael E"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Subject:
RE: Coke ICR Fenceline Monitoring - Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP)
Dr. Jones,

In accordance with EPA's Coke ICR received 6/29/22 and your 8/30/22 email, Cleveland-Cliffs Burns Harbor timely submits the attached revised Fenceline Monitoring - Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) for EPA's approval.

Thank you,

Rhiannon ulatowski
Environmental Engineer-Air
p<PHONE_NUMBER>   m<PHONE_NUMBER>
<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>CLEVELAND-CLIFFS INC.

<<Burns Harbor ICR_QAPP_R1_09122022.pdf>>

From: Jones, DonnaLee<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2022 1:29 PM
To: Ulatowski, Rhiannon<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Zavoda, Rich<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Kistler, Katie E<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Maicher, Thomas W<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Beranek, Rob<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Long, Michael E<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Cc: GABRIELLE RAYMOND<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>Mcginn, Kevin<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Shappley, Ned<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Coke ICR Fenceline Monitoring - Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP)

Hello Ms. Ulatowski, et al: Thank you for the submission of your QAPP in response to the 2022 Clean Air Act section 114 test request for the Coke Ovens RTR. We had the following comments and requests:

"This plan needs some corrections. The area of the coke oven part of the facility (17 acres) was used to determine the number of sample location, but the samples were then located at the boundary of the entire facility (~1900 acres). The sample locations will need to be redone, either by bringing the circle of samples so that they are around just the coke oven facility, or by increasing the number of samplers to reflect the total facility area used (~1900 acres). There are no issues with the current interior sampling locations or the location of the TO-13/15 fenceline locations. The locations across the highway could be problematic due to the introduction of interferents and mobile sources, so you might want to reconsider those positions."

Please submit a revised QAPP documents addressing these deficiencies by Monday, September 12, 2022 COB.

Thank you for your efforts wth this 114 request.

Regards,
Donna Lee Jones, Ph.D.
Senior Technical Advisor, Metals Sector
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Sector Policies and Programs Division / Metals & Inorganic Chemicals Group (D243-02)
Research Triangle Park, NC  27711
Tele:<PHONE_NUMBER>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fax<PHONE_NUMBER>
"Reasonableness never fails to be appreciated."  - anon.

Pronouns - She/Her/Hers
Salutation - Dr./Ms.

From: Ulatowski, Rhiannon<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>>
Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2022 7:21 PM
To: Coke ICR2<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>>; Jones, DonnaLee<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>>; French, Chuck<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>>
Cc: Zavoda, Rich<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>>; Kistler, Katie E<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>>; Maicher, Thomas W<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>>; Beranek, Rob<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>>; Long, Michael E<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>>
Subject: Coke ICR Fenceline Monitoring - Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP)

Dr. Jones,

In accordance with EPA's Coke ICR received 6/29/22, Cleveland-Cliffs Burns Harbor timely submits the attached Fenceline Monitoring - Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) for EPA's approval.

Thank you,

Rhiannon ulatowski
Environmental Engineer-Air
p<PHONE_NUMBER>   m<PHONE_NUMBER>
<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>CLEVELAND-CLIFFS INC.