78715 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 248 / Thursday, December 26, 2002 / Rules and Regulations PART 180   [ AMENDED]

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

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

§ 180.1001 [ Amended]

2. In subpart D, § 180.1001 is amended by: i. Removing from the table in paragraph ( c) the entry for urea `` use as a stabilizer and inhibitor.'' ii. Removing from the table in paragraph ( d) the entry for urea `` use as an adjuvant/ intensifier for herbicides.'' iii. Removing from the table in paragraph ( e) the entry for urea `` use as a stabilizer and inhibitor.''

§ 180.1117 [ Removed]

3. Section 180.1117 is removed. [ FR Doc. 02   32563 Filed 12   24   02; 8: 45 a. m.]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 180 [ OPP   2002   0277; FRL   7284   2]

Urea; Exemption from the Requirement of a Tolerance AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of urea when used in pesticide formulations. Ecolab, Inc. submitted a petition to EPA under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as amended by the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996, requesting an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. This regulation eliminates the need to establish a maximum permissible level for residues of urea. This final rule is being published in today's Federal Register with a companion Direct Final Rule entitled `` Urea: Revocation of Tolerance Exemptions'' DATES: This regulation is effective December 26, 2002. Objections and requests for hearings, identified by docket ID number OPP   2002   0277, must be received on or before February 24, 2003. ADDRESSES: Written objections and hearing requests submitted electronically, by mail, or through hand delivery/ courier. Follow the detailed instructions as provided in Unit VIII. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Treva C. Alston, Registration Division ( 7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460   0001; telephone number: ( 703) 308   8373; e mail address: alston. treva@ epa. gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

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

B. How Can I Get Copies of This Document and Other Related Information?

1. Docket. EPA has established an official public docket for this action under docket identification ( ID) number OPP   2002   0277. The official public docket consists of the documents specifically referenced in this action, any public comments received, and other information related to this action. Although a part of the official docket, the public docket does not include Confidential Business Information ( CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. The official public docket is the collection of materials that is available for public viewing at the Public Information and Records Integrity Branch ( PIRIB), Rm. 119, Crystal Mall # 2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA. This docket facility is open from 8: 30 a. m. to 4 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The docket telephone number is ( 703) 305   5805. 2. Electronic access. You may access this Federal Register document electronically through the EPA Internet under the `` Federal Register'' listings at http:// www. epa. gov/ fedrgstr/. A frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR part 180 is available at http:// www. access. gpo. gov/ nara/ cfr/ cfrhtml_ 00/ Title_ 40/ 40cfr180_ 00. html, a beta site currently under development. An electronic version of the public docket is available through EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, EPA Dockets. You may use EPA Dockets at http:// www. epa. gov/ edocket/ to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the official public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Although not all docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access any of the publicly available docket materials through the docket facility identified in Unit I. B. 1. Once in the system, select `` search,'' then key in the appropriate docket ID number.

II. Background and Statutory Findings In the Federal Register of April 7, 2000 ( 65 FR 18324) ( FRL   6499   7), EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act ( FFDCA), 21 U. S. C. 346a, as amended by the Food Quality Protection Act ( FQPA) ( Public Law 104   170), announcing the filing of a pesticide tolerance petition ( PP 9E6028) by Ecolab, Inc., 370 N. Wabasha Street, St. Paul, MN 55102. This notice included a summary of the petition prepared by the petitioner Ecolab. There were no comments received in response to the notice of filing. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.1001 be amended by establishing an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of urea in or on raw agricultural commodities, in processed commodities, and in or on meat and meat by products of cattle, sheep, hogs, goats, horses, poultry, milk, dairy products, eggs, seafood and shellfish, and fruits and vegetables when such residues result from the use of urea as a component of a food contact surface sanitizing solution for use in food handling establishments. Section 408( b)( 2)( A)( i) of the FFDCA allows EPA to establish an exemption from the requirement for a tolerance ( the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA determines that the exemption from tolerance is `` safe.'' Section 408( b)( 2)( A)( ii) defines `` safe'' to mean that `` there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable VerDate Dec< 13> 2002 17: 05 Dec 24, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 26DER1. SGM 26DER1 78716 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 248 / Thursday, December 26, 2002 / Rules and Regulations information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure. Section 408( b)( 2)( C) requires EPA to give special consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to `` ensure that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. * * *'' EPA performs a number of analyses to determine the risks from aggregate exposure to pesticide residues. First, EPA determines the toxicity of pesticides. Second, EPA examines exposure to the pesticide through food, drinking water, and through other exposures that occur as a result of pesticide use in residential settings.

III. Toxicological Profile Consistent with section 408( b)( 2)( D) of FFDCA, EPA has reviewed the available scientific data and other relevant information in support of this action and considered its validity, completeness and reliability and the relationship of this information to human risk. EPA has also considered available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and children. The nature of the toxic effects caused by urea are discussed in this unit. In the Federal Register of April 15, 2002 ( 67 FR 18197) ( FRL   6860   6), the Agency published its report of the Tolerance Reassessment Decision for urea. This Report contained the hazard characterization of urea. For a complete description of the use summary, hazard characterization, exposure assessment and risk assessment findings, see the Notice of April 15, 2002. These data are considered by the Agency to be sufficient to assess the potential hazard to humans, including infants and children.

IV. Summary of Risk Assessment Findings From the available animal studies and other data, EPA has concluded that urea exhibits a low toxicity and exposures to urea used either as an active or inert pesticide ingredient present a reasonable certainty of no harm to human health.

V. Cumulative Effects Section 408( b)( 2)( D)( v) requires that, when considering whether to establish, modify or revoke a tolerance, the Agency consider available information concerning the cumulative effects of a particular pesticide's residues and other substances that have a common mechanism of toxicity. Urea is a low toxicity chemical. EPA does not have, at this time, available data to determine whether urea has a common mechanism of toxicity with other subtances or how to include these pesticide chemicals in a cumulative risk assessment.

VI. Determination of Safety for U. S. Population, Infants and Children Based on the available data, EPA concludes that urea does not pose a dietary risk under reasonable foreseeable circumstances. Accordingly, EPA finds that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the general population, and to infants and chldren from aggregate exposure to urea. Because of the low toxicity of urea, a safety factor analysis has not been used to assess the risk. For the same reason, the tenfold safety factor for the protection of infants and children is unnecessary.

VII. Other Considerations A. Endocrine Disruptors FQPA requires EPA to develop a screening program to determine whether certain substances, including all pesticide chemicals ( both inert and active ingredients), may have an effect in humans that is similar to an effect produced by a naturally occurring estrogen, or such other endocrine effect. EPA has been working with interested stakeholeders to develop a screening and testing program as well as a priority setting scheme. As the Agency proceeds with implementation of this program, further testing of products containing urea may be required.

B. Analytical Method( s)

An analytical method is not required for enforcement purposes since the Agency is establishing an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance without any numerical limitation.

C. Existing Tolerances There are four existing tolerance exemptions for urea. They are as follows: § 180.1001( c), ( d), and ( e); and § 180.1117. However, in today's Federal Register, the Agency, acting on its on initiative, published a direct final rule revoking these four tolerance exemptions as they are no longer necessary. No uses are lost by revoking the above four tolerance exemptions, as the tolerance exemption established in this rule will cover these uses and the use requested by the petitioner. D. International Tolerances The Agency is not aware of any country requiring a tolerance for urea nor have any CODEX Maximum Residue Levels been established for any food crops at this time.

E. List 4A Classification Based on its low toxicity, urea will be classified as a List 4A inert ingredient. List 4A inert ingredients are minimal risk inert ingredients. Minimal risk does not imply no risk under any circumstances. Every substance can present some risk in certain circumstances. Minimal risk is used to indicate a substance for which there is no information to indicate that there is a basis for concern. Thus, the tolerance exemption will be established in 40 CFR 180.950 which holds minimal risk chemicals instead of 40 CFR 180.1001 as requested by the petitioner, Ecolab.

VIII. Conclusions Based on the information in the record, EPA concludes that there is a reasonable certainty of no harm from aggregate exposure to residues of urea. Accordingly, EPA finds that exempting urea from the requirement of a tolerance will be safe.

IX. Objections and Hearing Requests Under section 408( g) of the FFDCA, as amended by the FQPA, any person may file an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a hearing on those objections. The EPA procedural regulations which govern the submission of objections and requests for hearings appear in 40 CFR part 178. Although the procedures in those regulations require some modification to reflect the amendments made to the FFDCA by the FQPA of 1996, EPA will continue to use those procedures, with appropriate adjustments, until the necessary modifications can be made. The new section 408( g) provides essentially the same process for persons to `` object'' to a regulation for an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance issued by EPA under new section 408( d), as was provided in the old FFDCA sections 408 and 409. However, the period for filing objections is now 60 days, rather than 30 days.

A. What Do I Need to Do to File an Objection or Request a Hearing? You must file your objection or request a hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided in this unit and in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify docket ID number OPP   2002   0277 in the subject line on the first page of your submission. All VerDate Dec< 13> 2002 11: 20 Dec 24, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 26DER1. SGM 26DER1 78717 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 248 / Thursday, December 26, 2002 / Rules and Regulations requests must be in writing, and must be mailed or delivered to the Hearing Clerk on or before February 24, 2003. 1. Filing the request. Your objection must specify the specific provisions in the regulation that you object to, and the grounds for the objections ( 40 CFR 178.25). If a hearing is requested, the objections must include a statement of the factual issues( s) on which a hearing is requested, the requestor's contentions on such issues, and a summary of any evidence relied upon by the objector ( 40 CFR 178.27). Information submitted in connection with an objection or hearing request may be claimed confidential by marking any part or all of that information as CBI. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. A copy of the information that does not contain CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public record. Information not marked confidential may be disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice. Mail your written request to: Office of the Hearing Clerk ( 1900C), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460   0001. You may also deliver your request to the Office of the Hearing Clerk in Rm. 104, Crystal Mall # 2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA. The Office of the Hearing Clerk is open from 8 a. m. to 4 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Office of the Hearing Clerk is ( 703) 603   0061. 2. Tolerance fee payment. If you file an objection or request a hearing, you must also pay the fee prescribed by 40 CFR 180.33( i) or request a waiver of that fee pursuant to 40 CFR 180.33( m). You must mail the fee to: EPA Headquarters Accounting Operations Branch, Office of Pesticide Programs, P. O. Box 360277M, Pittsburgh, PA 15251. Please identify the fee submission by labeling it `` Tolerance Petition Fees.'' EPA is authorized to waive any fee requirement `` when in the judgement of the Administrator such a waiver or refund is equitable and not contrary to the purpose of this subsection.'' For additional information regarding the waiver of these fees, you may contact James Tompkins by phone at ( 703) 305   5697, by e mail at tompkins. jim@ epa. gov, or by mailing a request for information to Mr. Tompkins at Registration Division ( 7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460   0001. If you would like to request a waiver of the tolerance objection fees, you must mail your request for such a waiver to: James Hollins, Information Resources and Services Division ( 7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460   0001. 3. Copies for the Docket. In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the Hearing Clerk as described in Unit IX. A., you should also send a copy of your request to the PIRIB for its inclusion in the official record that is described in Unit I. B. 1. Mail your copies, identified by docket ID number OPP   2002   0277, to: Public Information and Records Integrity Branch, Information Resources and Services Division ( 7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. In person or by courier, bring a copy to the location of the PIRIB described in Unit I. B. 1. You may also send an electronic copy of your request via e mail to: oppdocket epa. gov. Please use an ASCII file format and avoid the use of special characters and any form of encryption. Copies of electronic objections and hearing requests will also be accepted on disks in WordPerfect 6.1/ 8.0 or ASCII file format. Do not include any CBI in your electronic copy. You may also submit an electronic copy of your request at many Federal Depository Libraries.

B. When Will the Agency Grant a Request for a Hearing? A request for a hearing will be granted if the Administrator determines that the material submitted shows the following: There is a genuine and substantial issue of fact; there is a reasonable possibility that available evidence identified by the requestor would, if established resolve one or more of such issues in favor of the requestor, taking into account uncontested claims or facts to the contrary; and resolution of the factual issues( s) in the manner sought by the requestor would be adequate to justify the action requested ( 40 CFR 178.32).

X. Regulatory Assessment Requirements This final rule establishes an exemption from the tolerance requirement under FFDCA section 408( d) in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of Management and Budget ( OMB) has exempted these types of actions from review under Executive Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and Review ( 58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this rule has been exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use ( 66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This final rule does not contain any information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act ( PRA), 44 U. S. C. 3501 et seq., or impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 ( UMRA) ( Public Law 104   4). Nor does it require any special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low Income Populations ( 59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994); or OMB review or any Agency action under Executive Order 13045, entitled Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks ( 62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not involve any technical standards that would require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant to section 12( d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 ( NTTAA), Public Law 104   113, section 12( d) ( 15 U. S. C. 272 note). Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis of a petition under FFDCA section 408( d), such as the tolerance exemption in this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act ( RFA) ( 5 U. S. C. 601 et seq.) do not apply. In addition, the Agency has determined that this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism ( 64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure `` meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' `` Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the Executive order to include regulations that have `` substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.'' This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food handlers and food retailers, not States. This action does not VerDate Dec< 13> 2002 14: 36 Dec 24, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 26DER1. SGM 26DER1 78718 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 248 / Thursday, December 26, 2002 / Rules and Regulations alter the relationships or distribution of power and responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions of FFDCA section 408( n)( 4). For these same reasons, the Agency has determined that this rule does not have any `` tribal implications'' as described in Executive Order 13175, entitled Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments ( 65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000). Executive Order 13175, requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure `` meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications.'' `` Policies that have tribal implications'' is defined in the Executive order to include regulations that have `` substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and the Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.'' This rule will not have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule.

XI. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General The Congressional Review Act, 5 U. S. C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the U. S. Senate, the U. S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of this final rule in the Federal Register. This final rule is not a `` major rule'' as defined by 5 U. S. C. 804( 2). List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: December 12, 2002. Peter Caulkins, Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180   [ AMENDED]

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

Authority: 21 U. S. C. 321( q), 346( a) and 371.

2. Section 180.950 is amended by adding alphabetically the following ingredient to the table in paragraph ( e) to read as follows.

§ 180.950 Tolerance exemptions for minimal risk active and inert ingredients.

* * * * *

( e) * * *

Chemical CAS No.

* * * * * Urea ................................................................................................................................... 57   13   6 [ FR Doc. 02   32564 Filed 12   24   02; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 261 [ FRL   7429   3]

RIN 2003   AA00 Regulatory Innovations: Pilot Specific Rule for Electronic Materials in the EPA Region III Mid Atlantic States; Hazardous Waste Management System; Modification of the Hazardous Waste Program; Cathode Ray Tubes AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency. ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: Many used cathode ray tubes ( CRTs) are currently classified as characteristic hazardous wastes under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ( RCRA). Such CRTs are therefore subject to the hazardous waste regulations of RCRA Subtitle C unless they come from a household or a conditionally exempt small quantity generator. Today EPA is taking direct final action on a revision to its hazardous waste program under RCRA to exclude used CRTs and glass removed from CRTs from the definition of `` solid waste'' in the EPA Region III Mid Atlantic States ( which include the States of Delaware, Maryland, and West Virginia, the Commonwealths of Pennsylvania and Virginia, and the District of Columbia). Additionally, the preamble to this rule clarifies when used CRTs and other used electronic equipment become a `` solid waste.'' This rule will support an ongoing e Cycling Pilot Project of EPA Region III's Mid Atlantic States, which is promoting reuse and recycling of electronics. EPA believes that today's direct final rule will encourage increased recycling and better management of these materials in Region III states. EPA has proposed a similar, albeit broader, conditional exclusion for CRTs and certain other electronic materials that would be effective nationwide ( June 12, 2002, 67 FR 40508   40528). EPA is promulgating this regional rule now because it believes that implementing the rule in the Region III states will produce information about the CRT conditional exclusion that will be useful to EPA as it assesses the appropriateness of adopting the RCRA exclusion nationally. EPA expects to withdraw the regional rule if and when a final national rule becomes effective. DATES: This direct final rule is effective on February 24, 2003 without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by January 27, 2003. If we receive such comment, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that this rule will not take effect. ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted by mail or electronically. Commenters must send an original and two copies of their comments referencing docket number III   02   OEI   01 to: Marie Holman ( 3EI00), U. S. EPA Region III, Office of Environmental Innovation, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103   2029 or holman. marie@ epa. gov. Further VerDate Dec< 13> 2002 11: 20 Dec 24, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 26DER1. SGM 26DER1


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 177 (Thursday, September 12, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 56264]
[FR Doc No: 2013-22302]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[File No. 500-1]

Big Bear Mining Corp., Four Rivers BioEnergy, Inc., Mainland
Resources, Inc., QI Systems Inc., South Texas Oil Co., and Synova
Healthcare Group, Inc.; Order of Suspension of Trading

September 10, 2013.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Big Bear Mining Corp. because it has not filed any periodic reports
since the period ended December 31, 2011.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Four Rivers BioEnergy, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic
reports since the period ended July 31, 2011.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Mainland Resources, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic reports
since the period ended February 29, 2012.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
QI Systems, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic reports since
the period ended March 31, 2007.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
South Texas Oil Co. because it has not filed any periodic reports since
the period ended June 30, 2009.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Synova Healthcare Group, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic
reports since the period ended September 30, 2007.
    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 10, 2013, through 11:59 p.m. EDT on September 23, 2013.

    By the Commission.
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-22302 Filed 9-10-13; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 164 (Friday, August 23, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44351-44352]
[FR Doc No: 2019-18204]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary of Transportation

[Docket No. DOT-OST-2019-0118]
RIN 2105-ZA09
RIN 2105-ZA10

Interim Policies on Page Limits for National Environmental Policy
Act Documents and the Application of the One Federal Decision Process
to DOT Projects

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary of Transportation (OST), U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of availability and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of two U.S. Department
of Transportation interim policies for public comment: (1) Page Limits
for National Environmental Policy Act Documents and Focused Analyses
and (2) Application of the One Federal Decision Process to DOT
Projects. DOT anticipates that the Page Limits memorandum will improve
the quality of environmental documentation while reducing the length of
these documents. The One Federal Decision memorandum will provide
direction on how and when to apply the One Federal Decision process to
DOT projects.

DATES: Both of these memoranda are effective, as interim policies, on
the date of publication of this notice. Comments must be received by
September 23, 2019. Late-filed comments will be considered to the
extent practicable.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rhonda Solomon, Environmental
Protection Specialist, U.S. Department of Transportation, Office of the
Secretary, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, at (202)
366-5397 or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Electronic Access and Filing

    Availability: The Page Limits interim policy is available for
public review and comment at: https://www.transportation.gov/transportation-policy/permittingcenter/interim-policy-page-limits-nepa-documents-and-focused. The One Federal Decision interim policy is also
available at: https://www.transportation.gov/transportation-policy/permittingcenter/interim-policy-one-federal-decision-implementation.
    Comments should refer to the docket number above and be submitted
by one of the following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.
ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
    Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting comments and
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the Public
Participation heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this
document. Note that all comments received will be posted without change
to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided.
    Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may

review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78) or at https://www.transportation.gov/privacy.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov or to the street
address listed above. Follow the online instructions for accessing the
dockets.

Page Limits for National Environmental Policy Act Documents and Focused
Analyses

    Consistent with the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ)
``Regulations for Implementing the Procedural Provisions of the
National Environmental Policy Act'' (NEPA), this interim policy
provides that, to the extent practicable, DOT operating administrations
(OAs) should limit the text of draft and final environmental impact
statements (EISs) to 150 pages, unless they are of an unusual scope or
complexity. The interim policy also recommends that environmental
assessments not exceed 75 pages. The memorandum also discusses best
practices to help comply with these page limits.
    DOT finds it necessary to issue this interim policy because lengthy
NEPA documents, containing extraneous detail and needless data, have
resulted in increases in both time and cost to complete the
environmental review process and has made it increasingly difficult for
agency decisionmakers and the public to find the relevant information
regarding proposed actions. Setting appropriate page limits is
recognized as a mechanism to reduce excessive paperwork and ensure that
NEPA documentation is clear, concise, and focused.
    In addition to reaffirming the requirements found in CEQ
regulations, this memorandum is consistent with the Department's
existing NEPA implementing procedures, DOT Order 5610.1C, ``Procedures
for Considering Environmental Impacts'' (July 30, 1985). It also aligns
with the goals stated in Executive Order (E.O.) 13807, Establishing
Discipline and Accountability in the Environmental Review and
Permitting Process for Infrastructure Projects, 82 FR 40463 (Aug. 24,
2017), to achieve more efficient and effective Federal infrastructure
decisions. The E.O. includes the goal of completing all Federal
environmental reviews and authorization decisions for ``major
infrastructure projects'' within 2 years.

Application of the One Federal Decision Process to DOT Projects

    On August 15, 2017, the President signed E.O. 13807, Establishing
Discipline and Accountability in the Environmental Review and
Permitting Process for Infrastructure Projects. This E.O. mandated
Federal agencies to use a One Federal Decision (OFD) process for
``major infrastructure projects'' (MIPs). MIPs are defined by the E.O.
as infrastructure projects that require multiple authorizations by
Federal agencies, where the lead agency has determined that the
projects will require an environmental impact statement (EIS), and the
project sponsor has identified the reasonable availability of funds
sufficient to complete the project. The E.O. directs Federal agencies
that have MIPs to prepare a permitting timetable to be tracked through
the Federal Permitting Dashboard at https://www.permits.performance.gov/, establish an elevation process when a
milestone may be missed or extended through an accountability system,
and prepare a single environmental document and record of decision
(ROD). These projects should have one lead Federal agency to navigate
the project through the environmental review and authorization process.
The E.O. establishes the goal of completing the environmental review
process for MIPs in two years. In addition, all Federal authorization
decisions should be completed within 90 days of the issuance of the
ROD. Section 5(b)(iv)(C) also makes clear that the E.O. should be
followed by State, tribal, or local agencies that are exercising an
assignment or delegation of a Federal agency's NEPA responsibilities.
    On April 9, 2018, several Departments and agencies involved in the
development and approval of infrastructure projects, including DOT,
executed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to facilitate the
implementation of the E.O. The MOU outlined the roles and
responsibilities for the agencies. This included establishing a pre-
scoping process, concurrence points where each agency would have to
agree in writing to key decision points, an elevation process to
address disputes and schedule changes, and limited exceptions for
applying the OFD process.
    In September 26, 2018, Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
released Memorandum M-18-25, Modernize Infrastructure Permitting Cross-
Agency Priority Goal Performance Accountability System. This memorandum
outlined how agencies would be held accountable for the implementation
of the OFD process to their projects.
    The DOT interim policy on the Application of the OFD Process to DOT
Projects provides DOT NEPA practitioners the processes and procedures
to implement the E.O., the MOU, and the OMB accountability system
guidance to DOT projects. It incorporates guidance issued by OMB and
CEQ on the application of the E.O. to States participating in the NEPA
Assignment Program authorized by 23 U.S.C. 327. See M-19-11, Memorandum
for the Secretary of Transportation: Guidance on the Applicability of
E.O. 13807 to States with NEPA Assignment Authority under the Surface
Transportation Project Delivery Program (Feb. 26, 2019), https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/m-19-11.pdf.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 19, 2019.
Loren Smith,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Transportation Policy.
[FR Doc. 2019-18204 Filed 8-22-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P


Larry Sorrels/RTP/USEPA/US

03/05/2008 03:32 PM

To

<EMAIL_ADDRESS> cc

Al McGartland/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Bryan Hubbell/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Erika Sasser/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Janet Cakir/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Ken Adler/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Kevin Culligan/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Rob Brenner/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Rosalina Rodriguez/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Allen Basala/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Amy Lamson/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Charles Fulcher/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Cynthia Morgan/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Darryl Weatherhead/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, David Misenheimer/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Elizabeth Kopits/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Jim Ketcham-Colwill/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Ken Davidson/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Larry Sorrels/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Lillian Bradley/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Mark Corrales/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Nathalie Simon/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Neal Fann/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Serpil Kayin/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Tricia Crabtree/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Joseph-J Dougherty/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

Subject

Slide 10 of economic impact briefing - ozone final RIA - revised

Heidi,

This version of slide 10 from the briefing today should be easier to read now.   Thank you.

Larry Sorrels

Economist

US EPA/OAQPS/HEID/ABCG

C439-02

RTP, NC 27711

(919) 541-5041

fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>


[Federal Register: October 22, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 203)]
[Notices]
[Page 54617-54618]
[DOCID:fr22oc09-107]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-60833; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2009-91]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Amending the Dates
of the Quarterly Expansion of the Penny Pilot Program for Options

October 16, 2009.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that on October 13, 2009, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II
below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend the dates of the quarterly expansion
of the Penny Pilot Program for Options (``Penny Pilot'' or ``Pilot'').
There are no changes to the Rule text. A copy of this filing is
available on the Exchange's Web site at http://www.nyse.com, at the
Exchange's principal office and at the Commission's Public Reference
Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    NYSE Arca proposes to amend the dates of the quarterly expansion of
the Pilot.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Exchange Act Release No. 60711 (September 23, 2009), 74
FR 49419 (September 28, 2009) (order approving SR-NYSEArca-2009-44).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to add 75 issues to the Pilot on November 2,
2009; February 1, 2010; May 3, 2010; and August 2, 2010. The issues to
be added on November 2, 2009 will be based on the most actively traded
multiply listed issues for the six month period from April 1, 2009
through September 30, 2009. The issues to be added on February 1, 2010
will be based on the most actively traded multiply listed issues for
the six month period from July 1, 2009 through December 31, 2009. The
issues to be added on May 3, 2010 will be based on the most actively
traded multiply listed issues for the six month period from October 1,
2009 through March 31, 2010. The issues to be added on August 2, 2010
will be based on the most actively traded multiply listed issues for
the six month period from January 1, 2010 through June 30, 2010.
    The purpose of the date adjustment for the Pilot is because of
concerns raised by NYSE Arca Option Trading Permit (``OTP'') Holders
and Firms. After the Exchange received approval to extend and expand
the Pilot, many OTP Holders and Firms expressed concern that a date
that did not correspond with the start of a calendar month would
interfere with month end processing for billing and cost allocation
purposes.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, in that it
is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanisms of a free and open market and
a national market system and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest. As described herein, the Exchange is simply revising
the dates of the quarterly expansion of the Pilot, by one week, so as
to avoid problems for OTP Holders and Firms regarding their month end
processing.

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

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

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

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \5\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\6\
Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the
protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative prior to
30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate if consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \7\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \6\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \8\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally does
not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the filing.\9\
However, pursuant to Rule 19b4(f)(6)(iii),\10\ the Commission may
designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked
the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal
may become operative immediately upon filing. The Commission believes
that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the
protection of

investors and the public interest because doing so will accommodate the
administrative concerns of certain market participants while still
allowing the Exchange to expand the Pilot in a manner that is
consistent with the Commission's prior approval of the extension and
expansion of the Pilot.\11\ Furthermore, the proposal will delay the
expansion of the Pilot by only one week and will therefore facilitate
expansion of the Pilot in a timely manner. Accordingly, the Commission
designates the proposed rule change as operative upon filing with the
Commission.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires the Exchange to give the Commission written notice of the
Exchange's intent to file the proposed rule change along with a
brief description and the text of the proposed rule change, at least
five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule
change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The
Exchange has satisfied this pre-filing requirement.
    \10\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \11\ See supra note 4.
    \12\ For purposes only of waiving the operative delay for this
proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact
on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSEArca-2009-91 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2009-91. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,
all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours
of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the self-regulatory
organization. All comments received will be posted without change; the
Commission does not edit personal identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-
NYSEArca-2009-91 and should be submitted on or before November 12,
2009.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-25428 Filed 10-21-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 79 (Monday, April 25, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 24351]
[FR Doc No: 2022-08676]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-94744; File No. SR-CboeBZX-2022-017]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Designation of Longer Period for Commission Action on a Proposed Rule
Change To Amend BZX Rule 11.17, Clearly Erroneous Executions

April 19, 2022.
    On March 7, 2022, Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (``BZX'') filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to
Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\
and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to (i) make the
current clearly erroneous execution (``CEE'') pilot program permanent,
and (ii) limit the circumstances where CEE reviews would continue to be
available during Regular Trading Hours.\3\ The proposed rule change was
published for comment in the Federal Register on March 11, 2022.\4\ The
Commission has received no comment letters on the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ The term ``Regular Trading Hours'' means the time between
9:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time. See BZX Rule 1.5(w).
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 94374 (March 7,
2022), 87 FR 14062.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act \5\ provides that, within 45 days of
the publication of notice of the filing of a proposed rule change, or
within such longer period up to 90 days as the Commission may designate
if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its
reasons for so finding or as to which the self-regulatory organization
consents, the Commission shall either approve the proposed rule change,
disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. The
45th day after publication of the notice for this proposed rule change
is April 25, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission hereby is extending the 45-day time period for
Commission action on the proposed rule change. The Commission finds
that it is appropriate to designate a longer period within which to
take action on the proposed rule change so that it has sufficient time
to consider the proposed rule change. Accordingly, pursuant to Section
19(b)(2) of the Act,\6\ the Commission designates June 9, 2022, as the
date by which the Commission shall either approve or disapprove, or
institute proceedings to determine whether to disapprove, the proposed
rule change (File No. SR-CboeBZX-2022-017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Id.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(31).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-08676 Filed 4-22-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 156 (Thursday, August 13, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48516-48517]
[FR Doc No: 2015-19891]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #2

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

    Docket Numbers: ER11-1881-007; ER11-1882-007; ER11-1883-007; ER11-
1885-007; ER11-1886-007; ER11-1887-007; ER11-1889-007; ER11-1890-007;
ER11-1892-007; ER11-1893-007; ER11-1894-007.
    Applicants: Burley Butte Wind Park, LLC, Golden Valley Wind Park,
LLC, Milner Dam Wind Park, LLC, Oregon Trail Wind Park, LLC, Pilgrim
Stage Station Wind Park, LLC, Thousand Springs Wind Park, LLC, Tuana
Gulch Wind Park, LLC, Camp Reed Wind Park, LLC, Payne's Ferry Wind
Park, LLC, Salmon Falls Wind Park, LLC, Yahoo Creek Wind Park, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of the IWP
Sellers.

    Filed Date: 8/7/15.
    Accession Number: 20150807-5051.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/28/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2395-000.
    Applicants: Tucson Electric Power Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Construction Agreements to
be effective 10/7/2015.
    Filed Date: 8/7/15.
    Accession Number: 20150807-5123.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/28/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2396-000.
    Applicants: PacifiCorp.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Clatskanie PUD E&P Agreement
Troutdale Sub to be effective 10/7/2015.
    Filed Date: 8/7/15.
    Accession Number: 20150807-5138.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/28/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2397-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., Public Service Electric
and Gas Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: PSE&G submits revisions to
the OATT Attachment H-10A adjusting the PBOP to be effective 1/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 8/7/15.
    Accession Number: 20150807-5147.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/28/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2398-000.
    Applicants: New York Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: NYISO 205 joint filing re:
IA among NYISO, NYSEG, TrAILCo and PJM to be effective 8/8/2015.
    Filed Date: 8/7/15.
    Accession Number: 20150807-5172.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/28/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2399-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., CMS Energy Resource
Management Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Original Service Agreement
No. 4174--NITSA among PJM and CMS ERM to be effective 12/31/9998.
    Filed Date: 8/7/15.
    Accession Number: 20150807-5178.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/28/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2400-000.
    Applicants: New York State Electric & Gas Corporation.
    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Cancellation of Services
Agreement with FirstEnergy Service Company to be effective 8/8/2015.
    Filed Date: 8/7/15.
    Accession Number: 20150807-5181.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/28/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2401-000.
    Applicants: Pennsylvania Electric Company, Trans-Allegheny
Interstate Line Company, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Penelec and TrAILCo submit
Original SA No. 4239 and Revised SA No. 3963 to be effective 8/8/2015.
    Filed Date: 8/7/15.
    Accession Number: 20150807-5198.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/28/15.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: August 7, 2015.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-19891 Filed 8-12-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P