[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 217 (Tuesday, November 10, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 69736]
[FR Doc No: 2015-28706]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[File No. 500-1]

In the Matter of Inelco Corp., and Teliphone Corp.; Order of
Suspension of Trading

November 6, 2015.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Inelco Corp. (CIK No. 1427352), a revoked Nevada corporation with its
principal place of business listed as Coral Springs, Florida with stock
quoted on OTC Link under the ticker symbol INLC, because it has not
filed any periodic reports since the period ended June 30, 2013. On
January 14, 2015, a delinquency letter was sent by the Division of
Corporation Finance to Inelco requesting compliance with their periodic
filing obligations, but Inelco did not receive the delinquency letter
due to its failure to maintain a valid address on file with the
Commission as required by Commission Rules (Rule 301 of Regulation S-T,
17 CFR 232.301 and Section 5.4 of EDGAR Filer Manual).
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Teliphone Corp. (CIK No. 1101783), a Nevada corporation with its
principal place of business listed as Vancouver, British Columbia,
Canada with stock quoted on OTC Link under the ticker symbol TLPH,
because it has not filed any periodic reports since the period ended
March 31, 2013. On January 14, 2015, a delinquency letter was sent by
the Division of Corporation Finance to Teliphone requesting compliance
with their periodic filing obligations, and Teliphone received the
delinquency letter on February 6, 2015, but failed to cure its
delinquencies.
    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. EST
on November 6, 2015, through 11:59 p.m. EST on November 19, 2015.

    By the Commission.
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-28706 Filed 11-6-15; 11:15 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 238 (Wednesday, December 13, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 86411-86413]
[FR Doc No: 2023-27273]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-99111; File No. SR-CBOE-2023-064]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Fees for the Cboe Silexx Platform

December 7, 2023.
    Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on December 1, 2023, Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``Cboe Options'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I,
II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. 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\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``Cboe Options'') proposes
to amend fees for the Cboe Silexx platform. The text of the proposed
rule change is provided in Exhibit 5.
    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's website (http://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), at the Exchange's Office of the
Secretary, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend fees for the Cboe Silexx platform
(``Silexx platform''),\3\ effective December 1, 2023. By way of
background, the Silexx platform consists of a ``front-end'' order entry
and management trading platform (also referred to as the ``Silexx
terminal'') for listed stocks and options that supports both simple and
complex orders, and a ``back-end'' platform which provides a connection
to the infrastructure network. From the Silexx platform (i.e., the
collective front-end and back-end platform), a Silexx user has the
capability to send option orders to U.S. options exchanges, send stock
orders to U.S. stock exchanges (and other trading centers), input
parameters to control the size, timing, and other variables of their
trades, and also includes access to real-time options and stock market
data, as well as access to certain historical data. The Silexx platform
is designed so that a user may enter orders into the platform to send
to an executing broker (including Trading Permit Holders (``TPHs'')) of
its choice with connectivity to the platform, which broker will then
send the orders to Cboe Options (if the broker is a TPH) or other U.S.
exchanges (and trading centers) in accordance with the user's
instructions. The Silexx front-end and back-end platforms are a
software application that is installed locally on a user's desktop.
Silexx grants users licenses to use the platform, and a firm or
individual does not need to be a TPH to license the platform.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Cboe Silexx, Inc. (``Cboe Silexx''), which is a subsidiary
of the Exchange's parent, Cboe Global Markets, Inc., offers the
Silexx platform.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange offers several versions of its Silexx platform.
Originally, the Exchange offered the following versions of the Silexx
platform: Basic, Pro, Sell-Side, Pro Plus Risk and Buy-Side Manager
(``Legacy Platforms''). The Legacy Platforms are designed so that a
User may enter orders into the platform to send to the executing
broker, including TPHs, of its choice with connectivity to the
platform. The executing broker can then send orders to Cboe Options (if
the broker-dealer is a TPH) or other U.S. exchanges (and trading
centers) in accordance with the User's instructions. Users cannot
directly route orders through any of the Legacy Platforms to an
exchange or trading center nor is the platform integrated into or
directly connected to Cboe Option's System. In 2019, the Exchange made
available a new version of the Silexx platform, Silexx FLEX, which
supports the trading of FLEX Options and allows authorized Users with
direct access to the Exchange to establish connectivity and submit
orders directly to the Exchange.\4\ In 2020, the Exchange made an
additional version of the Silexx platform available, Cboe Silexx, which
supports the trading of non-FLEX Options and allows authorized Users
with direct access to the Exchange to establish connectivity and submit
orders directly to the Exchange.\5\ Cboe Silexx is essentially the same
platform as Silexx FLEX, with the same applicable functionality, except
that it additionally supports non-FLEX trading. Use of the Silexx
platform is completely optional.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 87028 (September 19,
2019) 84 FR 50529 (September 25, 2019) (SR-CBOE-2019-061). Only
Users authorized for direct access and who are approved to trade
FLEX Options may trade FLEX Options via Cboe Silexx. Only authorized
Users and associated persons of Users may establish connectivity to
and directly access the Exchange, pursuant to Rule 5.5 and the
Exchange's technical specifications.
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88741 (April 24,
2020) 85 FR 24045 (April 30, 2020) (SR-CBOE-2020-040). Only
authorized Users and associated persons of Users may establish
connectivity to and directly access the Exchange, pursuant to Rule
5.5 and the Exchange's technical specifications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CAT Fees
    The Exchange has adopted a fee for CAT Files.\6\ Particularly,
Silexx makes Consolidated Audit Trail (``CAT'')-formatted files
available to Silexx users for orders processed by the user via Silexx
applications. Users may also elect to have Silexx, which is a CAT
Reporter Agent, submit these files to CAT on their behalf. The Exchange
assesses a monthly fee of $250 per trading firm for CAT Files, payable
by the trading firm for CAT files related to its own and its customers'
executions. The Exchange proposes to increase the monthly fee for CAT
Files for all Silexx users, from $250 per month to $500 per month.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities Exchange Release No. 89285 (July 10, 2020) 85
FR 43284 (July 16, 2020) (SR-CBOE-2020-062).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Data Management Fee
    The Exchange also proposes to introduce a Data Management fee for
users of Legacy Platforms. This fee will cover the administrative costs
of supporting and maintaining data feeds a Legacy user may have, as
well as the cost of additional data provided in the terminal such as
earnings and dividends. The Exchange proposes to assess $20 per month
per Login ID.

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular,
the requirements of section 6(b) of the Act.\7\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
section 6(b)(5) \8\ requirements that the rules of an exchange be
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing,
settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating
transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest. Additionally,
the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
section 6(b)(5) \9\ requirement that the rules of an exchange not be
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers. Additionally, the Exchange also believes the
proposed rule change is consistent with section 6(b)(4) of the Act,
which requires that Exchange rules provide for the equitable allocation
of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its Trading Permit
Holders and other persons using its facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \9\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In particular, the Exchange believes the proposed monthly fee for
CAT Files is reasonable, equitable, and not unfairly discriminatory
because the CAT Files fee will apply to all users that elect to receive
CAT Files. Further, the Exchange notes receipt of the CAT Files is
completely voluntary and not compulsory. Indeed, all users of Silexx
can extract the necessary data from Silexx to create a CAT report
themselves to comply with their reporting obligations even if they
choose not to purchase the optional CAT Files. The Exchange believes
the CAT File fee, as proposed, remains reasonable, as the moderate
increase is the first increase to the fee since its introduction in
2020.
    The Exchange also believes the proposed Data Management fee is
reasonable, equitable, and not unfairly discriminatory because the fee
will apply to all users of the Legacy Platforms. Additionally, the
Exchange believes the proposed fee is reasonable as it accounts for
administrative costs that Cboe Silexx is incurring, but not charging
users, to maintain support for Legacy Platforms while Cboe Silexx
transitions away from the Legacy Platforms. Further, the Exchange
believes the proposed rule change to waive the Data Management fee for
Silexx FLEX and Cboe Silexx is reasonable because users of these newer
platforms would do not need to receive the support for older platforms.
As noted in previous filings, the Exchange is in the process of
transitioning the Legacy Platforms to the current version of Cboe
Silexx and Silexx FLEX.\10\ The Exchange believes not assessing these
fees for Silexx FLEX and Cboe Silexx also serves as an incentive to
market participants to transition to the current version of Cboe Silexx
from the Legacy Platforms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Securities Exchange Release No. 98722 (October 11,
2023) 88 FR 71619 (October 17, 2023) (SR-CBOE-2023-060). Only
authorized Users and associated persons of Users will continue to be
able to establish connectivity to and directly access the Exchange,
pursuant to Rule 5.5 and the Exchange's technical specifications.
Unauthorized Users will not be able to connect directly to the
Exchange. The new Cboe Silexx platform will function in the same
manner as the Legacy Platforms versions currently available to
Users: it will be completely voluntary; orders entered through the
platform will receive no preferential treatment as compared to
orders electronically sent to Cboe Options in any other manner;
orders entered through the platform will be subject to current
trading rules in the same manner as all other orders sent to the
Exchange, which is the same as orders that are sent through the
Exchange's System today; the Exchange's System will not distinguish
between orders sent from Silexx and orders sent in any other manner;
and Silexx will provide technical support, maintenance and user
training for the new platform version upon the same terms and
conditions for all Users. The Exchange plans to decommission the
Legacy Platforms at a future to-be-determined date, at which time
the Legacy Platforms will be unavailable to users.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Exchange notes that use of the platform is
discretionary and not compulsory, as users can choose to route orders,
including to Cboe Options, without the use of the platform. The
Exchange makes the platform available as a convenience to market
participants, who will continue to have the option to use any order
entry and management system available in the marketplace to send orders
to the Exchange and other exchanges; the platform is merely an
alternative offered by the Exchange.

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. The proposed change will not
impose any burden on intramarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because the
proposed rule change will apply to similarly situated participants
uniformly, as described in detail above.
    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule changes will
impose any burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because the
proposed change applies only to Cboe Options. Additionally, Cboe Silexx
is similar to types of products that are widely available throughout
the industry, including from some exchanges, at similar prices. To the
extent that the proposed changes make Cboe Options a more attractive
marketplace for market participants at other exchanges, such market
participants are welcome to become Cboe Options market participants.
Further, the proposed rule change relates to an optional platform. As
discussed, the use of the platform continues to be completely voluntary
and market participants will continue to have the flexibility to use
any entry and management tool that is proprietary or from third-party
vendors, and/or market participants may choose any executing brokers to
enter their orders. The Cboe Silexx platform is not an exclusive means
of trading, and if market participants believe that other products,
vendors, front-end builds, etc. available in the marketplace are more
beneficial than Cboe Silexx, they may simply use those products
instead, including for routing orders to the Exchange (indirectly or
directly if they are authorized Users). Use of the functionality is
completely voluntary.

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

    The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \11\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \12\
thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed
rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the

Commission will institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
file number SR-CBOE-2023-064 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to file number SR-CBOE-2023-064. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (https://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 website viewing and
printing 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 Exchange. Do not
include personal identifiable information in submissions; you should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. We
may redact in part or withhold entirely from publication submitted
material that is obscene or subject to copyright protection. All
submissions should refer to file number SR-CBOE-2023-064 and should be
submitted on or before January 3, 2024.

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

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

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-27273 Filed 12-12-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 45 (Friday, March 6, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 13059-13062]
[FR Doc No: 2020-04208]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-0130; FRL-10004-08]

Trifloxystrobin; Pesticide Tolerance

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes a tolerance for residues of
trifloxystrobin in or on pea and bean, dried shelled, except soybean,
subgroup 6C. Bayer CropScience requested this tolerance under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

DATES: This regulation is effective March 6, 2020. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before May 5, 2020, and
must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR
part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-0130, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Please review the visitor instructions and
additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

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

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
The following list of North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them.
Potentially affected entities may include:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

B. How can I get electronic access to other related information?

    You may access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA's
tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Government
Publishing Office's e-CFR site at http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl.

C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-0130 in the subject line on the first
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must
be in writing and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before
May 5, 2020. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections and
hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).

    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for
inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without
prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing
request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-0130, by one of
the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance

    In the Federal Register of June 7, 2019 (84 FR 26630) (FRL-9993-
93), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP
8F8729) by Bayer CropScience, 2 T.W. Alexander Drive, P.O. Box 12014,
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709. The petition requested that 40 CFR
part 180 be amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the
fungicide, trifloxystrobin (benzeneacetic acid, (E,E)-alpha-
(methoxyimino)-2-[[[[1-[3-(trifluoromethyl)
phenyl]ethylidene]amino]oxy]methyl]-methyl ester) and the free form of
its acid metabolite CGA-321113 ((E,E)-methoxyimino-[2-[1-(3-
trifluoromethylphenyl)-ethylideneaminooxymethyl]-phenyl]acetic acid) in
or on dried shelled pea and bean (except soybean) subgroup 6C at 0.06
parts per million (ppm). That document referenced a summary of the
petition prepared by Bayer CropScience, the registrant, which is
available in the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. There were no
comments received in response to the notice of filing.
    Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA has
modified the crop group name to be consistent with Agency nomenclature.

III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a
food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA 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
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings but does not include occupational exposure.
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA 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. . .
.''
    Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), and the factors
specified in FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the available
scientific data and other relevant information in support of this
action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a
determination on aggregate exposure for trifloxystrobin including
exposure resulting from the tolerances established by this action.
EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with trifloxystrobin
follows.
    On February 15, 2019 (84 FR 4340) (FRL-9985-23), EPA published in
the Federal Register a final rule establishing a tolerance for residues
of the fungicide trifloxystrobin in or on flax seed and amending an
existing tolerance for aspirated grain fractions based on the Agency's
conclusion that aggregate exposure to trifloxystrobin is safe for the
general population, including infants and children. See 84 FR 4340
(FRL-9985-23). That document contains a summary of the toxicological
profile and points of departure, assumptions for exposure assessment,
and Agency's determination regarding the children's safety factor,
which have not changed. The Agency conducted a revised risk assessment
to incorporate additional exposure to residues of trifloxystrobin
approved since that rulemaking and including the use on pea and bean,
dried shelled, except soybean, subgroup 6C.
    EPA's exposure assessments have been updated to include the
additional exposure from use of trifloxystrobin from use on pea and
bean, dried shelled, except soybean, subgroup 6C, i.e., reliance on
tolerance-level residues and an assumption of 100 percent crop treated
(PCT). EPA's aggregate exposure assessment incorporated this additional
dietary exposure, as well as exposure in drinking water and from
residential sources, although those latter exposures are not impacted
by the new uses on pea and bean and thus have not changed since the
last assessment. Further information about EPA's risk assessment and
determination of safety supporting the tolerances established in the
February 15, 2019 Federal Register action, as well as the new
trifloxystrobin tolerance can be found at http://www.regulations.gov in
the document entitled ``Trifloxystrobin. Human Health Risk Assessment
for the Proposed New Use on Flax Seed and Increase of Established
Tolerance on Aspirated Grain Fractions,'' dated October 31, 2018, in
docket ID EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0532.
    Acute dietary risks are below the Agency's level of concern: 3.4%
of the acute population adjusted dose (aPAD) for females 13 to 49 years
old, the only population group of concern. Chronic dietary risks are
below the Agency's level of concern: 58% of the chronic population
adjusted dose (cPAD) for all infants less than 1 year old, the group
with the highest exposure. There is not expected to be any handler
exposure, and there is no adverse systemic hazard via the dermal route
of exposure, so the only residential post-application scenario assessed
was for the incidental short-term oral exposure of children 1 to less
than 2 years old. Using the exposure assumptions described for short-
term exposures, EPA has concluded the combined short-term food, water,
and residential exposures result in aggregate MOEs above the LOC of 100
for all scenarios assessed and are not of concern.
    Therefore, based on the risk assessments and information described
above, EPA concludes there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will
result to the general population, or to infants and children from
aggregate exposure to trifloxystrobin residues. More detailed
information on the subject action to establish a tolerance in or on pea
and bean, dried shelled, except soybean, subgroup 6C can be found in
the document entitled, ``Trifloxystrobin. Human Health Aggregate Risk
Assessment for New Use on Dry Beans and Proposed Crop Group Expansion
from Dry Pea to Crop

Subgroup 6C'' by going to http://www.regulations.gov. The referenced
document is available in the docket established by this action, which
is described under ADDRESSES. Locate and click on the hyperlink for
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-0130.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    Adequate enforcement methodology (gas chromatography method with
nitrogen phosphorus detection (GC/NPD)) is available to enforce the
tolerance expression. The method may be requested from: Chief,
Analytical Chemistry Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes
Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755-5350; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
B. International Residue Limits

    In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations
Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food
standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain
the reasons for departing from the Codex level.
    Codex has established an MRL of 0.01 ppm for several of the
commodities in subgroup 6C with the exception of broad bean, chickpea,
cowpea, guar, lupin, blackeyed pea, crowder pea, pigeon pea and
southern pea for which no MRL is established. U.S. tolerances for
residues in the commodities of subgroup 6C are not harmonized with
Codex. Since the Codex MRL is significantly lower for some commodities,
harmonization is not possible because lowering the U.S. tolerance could
cause U.S. growers to have violative residues despite legal use of the
pesticide.

V. Conclusion

    Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of
trifloxystrobin in or on pea and bean, dried shelled, except soybean,
subgroup 6C at 0.06 ppm. Additionally, the existing tolerance on ``pea,
dry, seed'' is removed as unnecessary since it is part of the new
subgroup 6C tolerance.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action establishes a tolerance 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 action has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this action is not
subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), nor is it considered a
regulatory action under Executive Order 13771, entitled ``Reducing
Regulations and Controlling Regulatory Costs'' (82 FR 9339, February 3,
2017). This action does not contain any information collections subject
to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.), 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).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerance 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.
    This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or Tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
Tribal Governments, on the relationship between the National Government
and the States or Tribal Governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian Tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this action. In addition, this
action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded
mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
    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 (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).

VII. Congressional Review Act

    Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.),
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 action 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: February 6, 2020.
Michael Goodis,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:

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

0
2. In Sec.  180.555, amend the table in paragraph (a) as follows:

0
a. Add alphabetically the entry for ``Pea and bean, dried shelled,
except soybean, subgroup 6C''; and
0
b. Remove the entry for ``Pea, dry, seed''.
    The addition reads as follows:

Sec.  180.555  Trifloxystrobin; tolerances for residues.

    (a) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Parts per
                          Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                * * * * *
Pea and bean, dried shelled, except soybean, subgroup 6C....        0.06

                                * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 2020-04208 Filed 3-5-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 162 (Wednesday, August 23, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 57354-57356]
[FR Doc No: 2023-18170]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2023-0699]
RIN 1625-AA87

Security Zone; Lake Tahoe, Glenbrook, NV

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary security zone in
the navigable waters of Lake Tahoe, Glenbrook, NV within the San
Francisco Captain of the Port Zone. The security zone is along the Lake
Tahoe shoreline from approximately 200 yards from shore in the
Glenbrook area. The security zone is necessary to protect the harbors,
ports, and waterfront facilities of Lake Tahoe during a visit by high-
ranking government officials and their official party. Entry of vessels
or persons into this zone is prohibited unless specifically authorized
by the Captain of the Port San Francisco or a designated
representative.

DATES: This rule is effective without actual notice from August 23,
2023 through August 27, 2023. For the

purposes of enforcement, actual notice will be used from August 18,
2023, until August 23, 2023.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2023-0699 in the search box and click ``Search.'' Next, in the Document
Type column, select ``Supporting & Related Material.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this rule,
call or email LT William Harris, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Francisco,
Waterways Management Division; 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 Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice
and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because it is impracticable and contrary to
the public interest. The Coast Guard was notified of the need of this
security zone with less than two weeks' notice and did not receive
final details until August 16, 2023. The high-ranking government
official visit will occur before completion of any comment period,
thereby jeopardizing the security of the official and the harbors,
ports, and waterfront facilities of Lake Tahoe. Additionally, it is
impracticable to publish an NPRM because the visit is scheduled to
occur on August 18-27, 2023, and we must establish this security zone
by those dates. We lack sufficient time to solicit comments and review
them prior to issuing a final action.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date would
be impracticable because immediate action is needed to provide for the
protection of high-ranking government officials, security of the
harbors, ports, and waterfront facilities, and mitigation of potential
subversive acts.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C.
70051 and 70124. The Captain of the Port (COTP) has determined that the
high-ranking government officials and their official party plan to
visit the Glenbrook, NV area on Lake Tahoe. This area is located
adjacent to U.S. navigable waters in the San Francisco COTP zone. This
rule is needed to ensure the safety of high-ranking government
officials and their official party.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a security zone from August 18 through August
27, 2023. This security zone will cover all navigable waters of Lake
Tahoe, from surface to bottom, within the area formed by connecting the
following latitude and longitude points in the following order:
39[deg]5'33.7'' N, 119[deg]56'37.8'' W; thence to 39[deg]5'36.7'' N,
119[deg]56'28.2'' W; thence along the shore to 39[deg]5'30.8'' N,
119[deg]56'25.6'' W; thence to 39[deg]5'29.7'' N, 119[deg]56'36.2'' W
and thence to the point of beginning. This zone will be in effect from
12:01 a.m. on August 18, 2023, until 11:59 p.m. on August 27, 2023.
    The duration of this zone is intended to protect the harbors,
ports, and waterfront facilities during the high-ranking government
officials' visit to the local area and to ensure the safety of the
official party. No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the
security zone except for authorized support vessels, aircraft, and
support personnel, or other vessels authorized by the COTP or a
designated representative.

V. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. This rule has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action,'' under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, as
amended by Executive Order 14094 (Modernizing Regulatory Review).
Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB).
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
location, and duration of the security zone. The effect of this rule
will not be significant because local waterways users will be notified
by on-scene enforcement to ensure the security zone will result in
minimum impact. Additionally, vessel traffic will be able to pass
safely around the area of the security zone. The entities most likely
to be affected are pleasure craft engaged in recreational activities.
The rule will allow vessels to seek permission to enter the zone by
contacting the COTP or the COTP's designated representative through the
Command Post at telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or by VHF Marine Radio channel
21A.

B. Impact on Small Entities

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

and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The
Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency's
responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by
employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). The
Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or
complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

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

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does 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.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01, 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 determined that this action is one of
a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves a
security zone in effect 24 hours a day over a period of ten days. It is
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
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.

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.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051, 70124; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1,
6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
00170.1, Revision No. 01.3.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T11-137 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T11-137  Security Zone: Lake Tahoe, Glenbrook, NV.

    (a) Location. The following area is a security zone: All navigable
waters, from surface to bottom, within the area formed by connecting
the following latitude and longitude points in the following order:
39[deg]5'33.7'' N, 119[deg]56'37.8'' W; thence to 39[deg]5'36.7'' N,
119[deg]56'28.2'' W; thence to 39[deg]5'30.8'' N, 119[deg]56'25.6'' W;
thence to 39[deg]5'29.7'' N, 119[deg]56'36.2'' W and thence along the
shoreline to the point of beginning.
    (b) Definitions. As used in this section, designated representative
means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a Coast Guard coxswain,
petty officer, or other officer operating a Coast Guard vessel, and a
Federal, State, or local officer designated by or assisting the Captain
of the Port (COTP) San Francisco in the enforcement of the security
zone.
    (c) Regulations. (1) Under the general security zone regulations in
subpart D of this part, you may not enter the security zone described
in paragraph (a) of this section unless authorized by the COTP or a
designated representative.
    (2) The security zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as
may be permitted by the COTP or a designated representative.
    (3) To seek permission to enter, contact the COTP or the COTP's
designated representative through the Command Post at telephone (202)
604-8857 or by VHF Marine Radio channel 21A. Those in the security zone
must comply with all lawful orders or directions given to them by the
COTP or the COTP's designated representative.
    (d) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 12:01
a.m. on August 18, 2023, until 11:59 p.m. on August 27, 2023.

    Dated: August 17, 2023.
Taylor Q. Lam,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Sector San Francisco.
[FR Doc. 2023-18170 Filed 8-22-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: June 21, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 118)]
[Notices]
[Page 35011-35012]
[DOCID:fr21jn10-65]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

June 11, 2010.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG10-38-000.
    Applicants: CalRENEW-1 LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of CalRENEW-1 LLC.
    Filed Date: 04/30/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100430-5496.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. e.t. on Friday, June 25, 2010.

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

    Docket Numbers: ER97-3583-004.
    Applicants: GS Electric Generating Cooperative Inc.
    Description: GS Electric Generating Cooperative, Inc submits
Substitute First Revised Sheet No 1 to its Second Revised Rate Schedule
No 1.
    Filed Date: 06/10/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100611-0024.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. e.t. on Thursday, July 1, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-1039-001.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Informational Report of Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Filed Date: 06/11/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100611-5033.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. e.t. on Friday, July 2, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-1420-000.
    Applicants: Alcoa Power Generating Inc.
    Description: Alcoa Power Generating, Inc submits amendments to its
Electric Rate Schedule 19 the Power Exchange Agreement with Tennessee
Valley Authority.
    Filed Date: 06/10/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100611-0202.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. e.t. on Thursday, July 1, 2010.

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

    Docket Numbers: ES10-44-000.
    Applicants: Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc.
    Description: Supplement to Application of Orange and Rockland
Utilities, Inc.
    Filed Date: 06/10/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100610-5126.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. e.t. on Monday, June 21, 2010.

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

    Docket Numbers: RR10-12-000.
    Applicants: North American Electric Reliability Corp.
    Description: Petition of the North American Electric Reliability
Corporation for Approval of the Reliability Standard Processes Manual
Incorporating Proposed Revisions to the Reliability Standards
Development Process.
    Filed Date: 06/10/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100610-5128.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. e.t. on Monday, July 12, 2010.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. e.t. on the specified comment date. It is
not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket related to a
compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the same docket.
Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants
parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or
protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. In
reference to filings initiating a new proceeding, interventions or
protests submitted on or before the comment deadline need not be served
on persons other than the Applicant.
    As it relates to any qualifying facility filings, the notices of
self-certification [or self-recertification] listed above, do not
institute a proceeding regarding qualifying facility status. A notice
of self-certification [or self-recertification] simply provides
notification that the entity making the filing has determined the
facility named in the notice meets the applicable criteria to be a
qualifying facility. Intervention and/or protest do not lie in dockets
that are qualifying facility self-certifications or self-
recertifications. Any person seeking to challenge such qualifying
facility status may do so by filing a motion pursuant to 18 CFR
292.207(d)(iii). Intervention and protests may be filed in response to
notices of qualifying facility dockets other than self-certifications
and self-recertifications.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://
www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's

eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list.
They are also available for review in the Commission's Public Reference
Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the Web site
that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document
is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online
service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call (866) 208-
3676 (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-14854 Filed 6-18-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P