[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 52 (Monday, March 18, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16743-16746]
[FR Doc No: 2013-06120]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-69115; File No. SR-BOX-2013-10]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BOX Options Exchange LLC; Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend
the Fee Schedule for Trading on BOX

March 12, 2013.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) under the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby
given that on February 28, 2013, BOX Options Exchange LLC (the
``Exchange'') 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
Exchange filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act,\3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder,\4\
which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission.
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.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange is filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') a proposed rule change to amend the Fee Schedule for
trading on the BOX Market LLC (``BOX'') options facility. In
particular, the Exchange proposes to amend certain Exchange Fees for
Professionals set forth in Section I of the Fee Schedule so that
Professional Accounts are assessed the same fees as Broker-Dealers.
Additionally, the Exchange proposes to increase the existing liquidity
fees and credits for Non-Auction transactions within Section II of the
Fee Schedule. While changes to the Fee Schedule pursuant to this
proposal will be effective upon filing, the changes will become
operative on March 1, 2013. The text of the proposed rule change is
available from the principal office of the Exchange, at the
Commission's Public Reference Room and also on the Exchange's Internet
Web site at http://boxexchange.com.

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, Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend the Fee Schedule for trading on BOX.
In particular, the Exchange proposes to amend certain Exchange Fees for
Professionals set forth in Section I of the Fee Schedule so that all
Professional accounts are assessed the same fees as Broker-Dealers.
Additionally, the Exchange proposes to increase the existing liquidity
fees and credits for Non-Auction transactions within Section II of the
Fee Schedule.
    In Section I. Exchange Fees, the Exchange proposes increase Auction
Transaction \5\ fees for Professional PIP Orders or Agency Orders from
$0.00 to $0.35. For Non-Auction Transactions the Exchange proposes to
increase Professional fees from $0.20 to $0.40. Both of these increases
will put the Professional fees in line with those that Broker-Dealers
are currently charged. The Exchange notes that the proposed fees for
Professionals are within the range of Professional fees presently
assessed in the industry.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Auction Transactions are those transactions executed through
the Price Improvement Period (``PIP''), Solicitation, and
Facilitation auction mechanisms.
    \6\ Professional customers are charged $0.33 per contract for
Select Symbols on the International Securities Exchange (``ISE''),
$0.32 per contract for taking liquidity on NYSE Amex, and $0.45 or
more per contract on the NASDAQ Options Market (``NOM'') for adding
or removing liquidity in non-Penny Pilot securities. See ISE fee
schedule, available at: http://www.ise.com/assets/documents/OptionsExchange/legal/fee/fee_schedule.pdf, NYSE Amex Options Fee
Schedule, available at: https://globalderivatives.nyx.com/sites/globalderivatives.nyx.com/files/nyse_amex_options_fee_schedule_12_01_12__.pdf, and see NOM Fee Schedule, available at: http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/Micro.aspx?id=OptionsPricing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In Section II. Liquidity Fees and Credits, the Exchange proposes to
increase the fees and credits for Non-Auction Transactions.
Specifically, the Exchange proposes that the per contract fee for
orders that add liquidity to the BOX Book be raised to $0.30 from $0.22
in Penny Pilot Classes, and to $.75 from $0.65 in non-Penny Pilot
Classes. For orders that remove liquidity from the BOX Book, the
Exchange proposes to raise the per contract credit to $0.30 from $0.22
in Penny Pilot Classes, and to $0.75 from $0.65 in non-Penny Pilot
Classes.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with the
requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act,\7\ in general, and Section
6(b)(4) of the Act,\8\ in particular, in that it provides for the
equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among
BOX Options Participants and other persons using its facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposed fee change for Professionals in
both Auction Transactions and Non-Auction Transactions is reasonable,
equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because it charges
Professionals, whose activity

on BOX is akin to the order flow activity and system usage to that of
Broker-Dealers, the same fee for transactions as the fee charged to
Broker-Dealers. BOX does not assess ongoing systems access fees,
ongoing fees for access to BOX market data, or fees related to order
cancellation. Professional accounts, while Public Customers by virtue
of not being broker-dealers, generally engage in trading activity more
similar to broker-dealer proprietary trading accounts (more than 390
orders per day on average). BOX notes that as of December 2012, orders
for Professionals generally account for a majority of the orders BOX
receives on a given trading day. This level of trading activity draws
on a greater amount of BOX system resources than that of non-
Professional Public Customers, and thus, greater ongoing BOX
operational costs. Simply, the more orders submitted to BOX, the more
messages sent to and received from BOX, the more orders potentially
routed to away exchanges, and the more BOX system resources utilized.
As such, rather than passing the costs of these higher order volumes
along to all market participants, the Exchange believes it is more
reasonable and equitable to assess those costs to the persons directly
responsible. To that end, BOX aims to recover costs incurred by
assessing Professional accounts a market competitive fee for
transactions.
    The Exchange believes the proposed change to increase Professional
fees for Auction Transactions is not unfairly discriminatory as the
fees will apply to all Professionals and Broker-Dealers competing in
these transactions equally. Further, Professionals and Broker-Dealers
are free to change the manner in which they access BOX. A Professional
may, by sending fewer than 390 orders per day across the industry,
begin participating as a non-Professional, Public Customer and
potentially reduce transaction fees. Additionally, for Auction
Transactions, Professionals will still benefit from certain priority
advantages as a customer.\9\ As noted above, Professionals' order
sending behavior and trading activity tend to be more similar to
Broker-Dealers trading on a proprietary basis. This is particularly
true in considering orders in response to BOX auction mechanisms. As
such, the Exchange believes it is not unfairly discriminatory to charge
them the same fee as Broker-Dealers when competing for customer order
flow in these Auction Transactions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Rules 7150(f)(4) and 7270 regarding allocation and
executions within each BOX auction mechanism.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Professionals may elect to register as a Broker-Dealer and, once
registered, may apply to become a BOX Market Maker, subject to Exchange
Fees based on their ADV. The Exchange believes the proposed transaction
fees for Professionals is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory
because such Participants are not subject to the same obligations as
Market Makers when providing liquidity to the market. In particular,
Market Makers must maintain active two-sided markets in appointed
classes, and must meet certain minimum quoting requirements. As such,
the Exchange believes it is appropriate that Market Makers be charged
comparably lower transaction fees as compared to Professionals when the
Market Makers provide greater volumes of liquidity to the market. In
light of the ability to access BOX in a variety of ways, each of which
is priced differently, Professionals, Broker-Dealers and other market
participants may each select the most economically beneficial manner to
access BOX.
    Further, the Exchange believes the proposed fee change is equitable
and not unfairly discriminatory because it will assure that retail
investors (non-Professional, Public Customers) continue to receive the
appropriate marketplace advantages on BOX, while furthering fair
competition among marketplace professionals by treating them equally
when they compete for these desirable customer orders. The Exchange
believes it is reasonable and equitable to assess fees for
Professionals that are the same as those fees for Broker-Dealers
because it applies a pricing structure that groups these sophisticated
market participants together when they are competing in this manner.
    Generally, competing options exchanges assess Professionals fees at
comparable rates to those proposed by the Exchange, and comparable to
fees charged to Broker-Dealers.\10\ These proposed fee changes will
allow Professionals and Broker-Dealers to be charged equally for every
type of Exchange Fee. The Exchange operates within a highly competitive
market in which market participants can readily direct order flow to
any of several other competing venues if they deem fees at a particular
venue to be excessive. As such, the Exchange believes the proposed
increases are reasonable and equitable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Supra, note 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange further believes the proposed fee change for PIP
Orders or Agency Orders is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory
because Professionals generally do not initiate Auction Transactions,
unlike some Broker-Dealers. Doing so requires, in part, guaranteeing a
customer order an execution. Initiating an Auction Transaction for the
benefit of the customer order, and taking on this guarantee provides
these Participants potentially discounted fees.\11\ The Exchange
believes it is reasonable, equitable, and not unfairly discriminatory
to charge Professional accounts the same fee as Broker-Dealers to
compete for customer orders in Auction Transactions because when acting
in response to an auction, as opposed to initiating the transaction,
Professionals' behavior, systems' sophistication, and trading activity
are similar to Broker-Dealers, and distinct from the retail investors
on the opposite side of the Auction Transaction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Section I.A. of the Fee Schedule that provides Tiered
Fees with potential discounts for Participants that Initiate Auction
Transactions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes it is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory for Public Customers to be charged lower fees than
Professionals and Broker-Dealers for all transactions on BOX. The
securities markets generally, and BOX in particular, have historically
aimed to improve markets for investors and develop various features
within the market structure for the benefit of non-Professional, Public
Customers.\12\ As such, the Exchange believes the proposed fees for
Professional customer transactions are appropriate and not unfairly
discriminatory. Additionally, the Exchange believes it promotes the
best interests of investors to have lower Auction Transaction costs for
non-Professional, Public Customers, and that the BOX fee structure will
continue to attract this customer order flow to these auction
mechanisms which BOX believes will provide greater potential price
improvement to these investors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Note that BOX has historically imposed different, and
higher, routing fees for Professionals as compared to non-
Professional Public Customers. See Securities Exchange Act Release
Nos. 65538 (October 12, 2011), 76 FR 64413 (October 18, 2011)
(Adopting a $0.50 per contract routing fee for Professionals while
providing routing to non-Professional Public Customers at no
charge), and 68149 (November 5, 2012), 77 FR 67693 (November 13,
2012) (Continuing to charge Professionals $0.50 per contract
executed on away exchanges and exempting Public Customer accounts
from a routing fee for Directed Orders, provided 33% or more of a
Participant's Public Customer Directed Orders received during the
month are executed through PIP, and less than 45% of a Participant's
Directed Orders received during the month are routed to and executed
on an away exchange).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    BOX believes that the changes to its Non-Auction Transaction fees
and credits are equitable and non-

discriminatory in that they apply to all categories of Participants and
across all account types. BOX operates within a highly competitive
market in which market participants can readily direct order flow to
any of eight other competing venues if they deem fee levels at a
particular venue to be excessive. The changes to BOX credits and fees
proposed by this filing are reasonable because they are intended to
attract order flow to BOX by offering incentives to all market
participants to submit their orders to the Exchange. BOX notes that
this proposed rule change will increase both the fees and credit for
Non-Auction Transactions. The result is that BOX will collect a fee
from Participants that add liquidity and credit another Participant for
removing liquidity in the same transaction. Stated otherwise, the fees
collected will not necessarily result in additional revenue to BOX, but
will simply allow BOX to provide the credit incentive to Participants
to attract additional order flow to the Exchange. BOX believes it is
appropriate to provide incentives to market participants, which could
benefit all market participants by creating greater liquidity.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. BOX currently assesses
Professional Customers and Broker Dealers equally for other types of
Exchange Fees \13\ and this change will result in these participants
being charged equally for all Auction and Non-Auction transactions. The
BOX auction mechanisms provide the opportunity for market participants
to compete for customer orders. The PIP has no limitations regarding
the number of Market Makers, Options Participants that are not Market
Makers, and customers that can participate and compete for orders in
the PIP. BOX asserts that Participants are actively competing for
customer orders, which is clearly supported by the simple fact that
price improvement occurs in the PIP. Since the PIP began in 2004,
customers have received more than $400 million in savings through
better executions on BOX, a monthly average of more than $3.5 million
over that time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Section I. of the Fee Schedule. Professionals and
Broker Dealers are currently assessed equal fees in Improvement
Orders on the PIP, Responses in the Solicitation and Facilitation
Mechanism, and in Options Surcharge on the NDX and MNX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange does not believe the proposed fee change will inhibit
Professionals' ability to compete within BOX Auction Transactions.
Broker-Dealers currently compete actively within the PIP, and BOX does
not believe assessing Professionals a $0.35 per contract fee equivalent
to that of Broker-Dealers, would impede Professionals' ability, or the
incentive for Professionals, to compete therein. BOX notes that its
market model and fees are generally intended to benefit retail
customers by providing incentives for Participants to submit their
customer order flow to BOX, and the PIP in particular. BOX makes a
substantial amount of PIP-related data and statistics available to the
public on its Web site www.boxexchange.com. Specifically, PIP Fee Pilot
reports are available at: http://boxexchange.com/boxrReports_en; daily
PIP volumes and average price improvement at: http://boxexchange.com/volumes_en; and BOX execution quality reports at: http://boxexchange.com/executionQualityReport_en. The data indisputably
supports that the PIP provides price improvement for customer orders.
    Furthermore, this proposed rule change will result in Non-Auction
transactions being subject to increased fees and credits, which the
Exchange believes will promote competition by enabling the Exchange to
better compete for order flow and improve the Exchange's competitive
position.
    The fee changes proposed would assess Professionals the same fees
as Broker-Dealers and increase both the fees and credits for Non-
Auction Transactions. Because this change would charge Professionals
similarly to Broker-Dealers in all circumstances, charge them a fee
comparable to what Professionals and Broker-Dealers pay on competing
exchanges,\14\ and for additional reasons as stated above, the Exchange
does not believe that the proposed change will impose any burden on
competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes
of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Supra, note 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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)(ii) of the Exchange Act \15\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2)
thereunder,\16\ because it establishes or changes a due, fee, or other
charge applicable only to a member.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend the rule
change if it appears to the Commission that the action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
would otherwise further the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-BOX-2013-10 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.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BOX-2013-10. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than

those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-BOX-2013-10 and should be
submitted on or before April 8, 2013.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-06120 Filed 3-15-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: March 12, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 47)]
[Notices]
[Page 11012]
[DOCID:fr12mr07-74]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER07-527-000]

Longview Fibre Paper & Packaging, Inc.; Notice of Issuance of
Order

March 6, 2007.
    Longview Fibre Paper & Packaging, Inc. (Longview Fibre) filed an
application for market-based rate authority, with an accompanying rate
schedule. The proposed market-based rate schedule provides for the sale
of energy, capacity and ancillary services at market-based rates.
Longview Fibre also requested waivers of various Commission
regulations. In particular, Longview Fibre requested that the
Commission grant blanket approval under 18 CFR Part 34 of all future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability by Longview Fibre.
    On March 6, 2007, pursuant to delegated authority, the Director,
Division of Tariffs and Market Development--West, granted the requests
for blanket approval under Part 34. The Director's order also stated
that the Commission would publish a separate notice in the Federal
Register establishing a period of time for the filing of protests.
Accordingly, any person desiring to be heard or to protest the blanket
approvals of issuances of securities or assumptions of liability by
Longview Fibre should file a motion to intervene or protest with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure. 18 CFR 385.211, 385.214
(2004).
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing motions to
intervene or protest is April 5, 2007.
    Absent a request to be heard in opposition by the deadline above,
Longview Fibre is authorized to issue securities and assume obligations
or liabilities as a guarantor, indorser, surety, or otherwise in
respect of any security of another person; provided that such issuance
or assumption is for some lawful object within the corporate purposes
of Longview Fibre, compatible with the public interest, and is
reasonably necessary or appropriate for such purposes.
    The Commission reserves the right to require a further showing that
neither public nor private interests will be adversely affected by
continued approvals of Longview Fibre's issuance of securities or
assumptions of liability.
    Copies of the full text of the Director's Order are available from
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The Order may also be viewed on the Commission's
Web site at http://www.ferc.gov, using the eLibrary link. Enter the

docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number
filed to access the document. Comments, protests, and interventions may
be filed electronically via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
under the ``e-Filing'' link. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings.

Philis J. Posey,
 Acting Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-4384 Filed 3-9-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


minimum sample as
                                                                           specified in
                                                                           Method 30B at 40
                                                                           CFR part 60,
                                                                           appendix A).
Oxides of nitrogen..............  76 parts per        Biomass--290 parts  3-run average (for  Performance test
                                   million dry         per million dry     Method 7E, 1 hour   (Method 7 or 7E
                                   volume.             volume. Coal--340   minimum sample      at 40 CFR part
                                                       parts per million   time per run).      60, appendix A-
                                                       dry volume.                             4).
Particulate matter filterable...  110 milligrams per  Biomass--11         3-run average       Performance test
                                   dry standard        milligrams per      (collect a          (Method 5 or 29
                                   cubic meter.        dry standard        minimum volume of   at 40 CFR part
                                                       cubic meter.        1 dry standard      60, appendix A-3
                                                       Coal--160           cubic meter).       or appendix A-8)
                                                       milligrams per                          if the unit has
                                                       dry standard                            an annual average
                                                       cubic meter.                            heat input rate
                                                                                less than or
                                                                                equal to 250
                                                                                MMBtu/hr; or PM
                                                                                CPMS (as
                                                                                specified in Sec.
                                                                                60.2710(x)) if
                                                                                the unit has an
                                                                                annual average
                                                                                heat input rate
                                                                                greater than 250
                                                                                MMBtu/hr.

Sulfur dioxide..................  720 parts per       Biomass--7.3 parts  3-run average (1    Performance test
                                   million dry         per million dry     hour minimum        (Method 6 or 6c
                                   volume.             volume. Coal--650   sample time per     at 40 CFR part
                                                       parts per million   run).               60, appendix A-
                                                       dry volume.                             4).
Fugitive ash....................  Visible emissions   Visible emissions   Three 1-hour        Visible emission
                                   for no more than    for no more than    observation         test (Method 22
                                   5 percent of the    5 percent of the    periods.            at 40 CFR part
                                   hourly              hourly                                  60, appendix A-
                                   observation         observation                             7).
                                   period.             period.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ The date specified in the state plan can be no later than 3 years after the effective date of approval of a
  revised state plan or February 7, 2018.
\b\ All emission limitations (except for opacity) are measured at 7 percent oxygen, dry basis at standard
  conditions. For dioxins/furans, you must meet either the total mass basis limit or the toxic equivalency basis
  limit.
\c\ If you are conducting stack tests to demonstrate compliance and your performance tests for this pollutant
  for at least 2 consecutive years show that your emissions are at or below this limit, you can skip testing
  according to Sec.   60.2720 if all of the other provisions of Sec.   60.2720 are met. For all other pollutants
  that do not contain a footnote ``c'', your performance tests for this pollutant for at least 2 consecutive
  years must show that your emissions are at or below 75 percent of this limit in order to qualify for skip
  testing, with the exception of annual performance tests to certify a CEMS or PM CPMS.
\d\ Incorporated by reference, see Sec.   60.17.

Table 8 to Subpart DDDD of Part 60--Model Rule--Emission Limitations That Apply to Waste-Burning Kilns After May
                                                    20, 2011
                                    [Date to be specified in state plan] \a\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                And determining
        For the air pollutant             You must meet this      Using this averaging    compliance using this
                                       emission limitation \b\            time                    method
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cadmium..............................  0.0014 milligrams per    3-run average (collect   Performance test
                                        dry standard cubic       a minimum volume of 2    (Method 29 at 40 CFR
                                        meter\c\.                dry standard cubic       part 60, appendix A-
                                                                 meters).                 8).
Carbon monoxide......................  110 (long kilns)/790     3-run average (1 hour    Performance test
                                        (preheater/              minimum sample time      (Method 10 at 40 CFR
                                        precalciner) parts per   per run).                part 60, appendix A-
                                        million dry volume.                               4).
Dioxins/furans (total mass basis)....  1.3 nanograms per dry    3-run average (collect   Performance test
                                        standard cubic           a minimum volume of 4    (Method 23 at 40 CFR
                                        meter\c\.                dry standard cubic       part 60, appendix A-
                                                                 meters).                 7).
Dioxins/furans (toxic equivalency      0.075 nanograms per dry  3-run average (collect   Performance test
 basis).                                standard cubic           a minimum volume of 4    (Method 23 at 40 CFR
                                        meter\c\.                dry standard cubic       part 60, appendix A-
                                                                 meters).                 7).
Hydrogen chloride....................  3.0 parts per million    3-run average (collect   Performance test
                                        dry volume\c\.           a minimum volume of 1    (Method 321 at 40 CFR
                                                                 dry standard cubic       part 63, appendix A of
                                                                 meter) or 30-day         this part) or HCl CEMS
                                                                 rolling average if HCl   if a wet scrubber or
                                                                 CEMS is being used.      dry scrubber is not
                                                                                used.
Lead.................................  0.014 milligrams per     3-run average (collect   Performance test
                                        dry standard cubic       a minimum volume of 2    (Method 29 at 40 CFR
                                        meter\c\.                dry standard cubic       part 60, appendix A-
                                                                 meters).                 8).
Mercury..............................  0.011 milligrams per     30-day rolling average.  Mercury CEMS or sorbent
                                        dry standard cubic                                trap monitoring system
                                        meter.                                            (performance
                                                                                specification 12A or
                                                                                12B, respectively, of
                                                                                appendix B of this
                                                                                part.)
Oxides of nitrogen...................  630 parts per million    3-run average (for       Performance test
                                        dry volume.              Method 7E, 1 hour        (Method 7 or 7E at 40
                                                                 minimum sample time      CFR part 60, appendix
                                                                 per run).                A-4).
Particulate matter filterable........  4.6 milligrams per dry   30-day rolling average.  PM CPMS (as specified
                                        standard cubic meter.                             in Sec.   60.2710(x))
Sulfur dioxide.......................  600 parts per million    3-run average (for       Performance test
                                        dry volume.              Method 6, collect a      (Method 6 or 6c at 40
                                                                 minimum of 20 liters;    CFR part 60, appendix
                                                                 for Method 6C, 1 hour    A-4).
                                                                 minimum sample time
                                                                 per run).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ The date specified in the state plan can be no later than 3 years after the effective date of approval of a
  revised state plan or February 7, 2018.
\b\ All emission limitations are measured at 7 percent oxygen, dry basis at standard conditions. For dioxins/
  furans, you must meet either the total mass basis limit or the toxic equivalency basis limit.
\c\ If you are conducting stack tests to demonstrate compliance and your performance tests for this pollutant
  for at least 2 consecutive years show that your emissions are at or below this limit, you can skip testing
  according to Sec.   60.2720 if all of the other provisions of Sec.   60.2720 are met. For all other pollutants
  that do not contain a footnote ``c'', your performance tests for this pollutant for at least 2 consecutive
  years must show that your emissions are at or below 75 percent of this limit in order to qualify for skip
  testing, with the exception of annual performance tests to certify a CEMS or PM CPMS.

  Table 9 to Subpart DDDD of Part 60--Model Rule--Emission Limitations That Apply to Small, Remote Incinerators
                                               After May 20, 2011
                                    [Date to be specified in state plan] \a\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                And determining
        For the air pollutant             You must meet this      Using this averaging    compliance using this
                                       emission limitation \b\            time                    method
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cadmium..............................  0.95 milligrams per dry  3-run average (collect   Performance test
                                        standard cubic meter.    a minimum volume of 1    (Method 29 at 40 CFR
                                                                 dry standard cubic       part 60, appendix A-
                                                                 meters per run).         8).
Carbon monoxide......................  64 parts per million     3-run average (1 hour    Performance test
                                        dry volume.              minimum sample time      (Method 10 at 40 CFR
                                                                 per run).                part 60, appendix A-
                                                                                4).
Dioxins/furans (total mass basis)....  4,400 nanograms per dry  3-run average (collect   Performance test
                                        standard cubic meter     a minimum volume of 1    (Method 23 at 40 CFR
                                        \b\.                     dry standard cubic       part 60, appendix A-
                                                                 meters per run).         7).
Dioxins/furans (toxic equivalency      180 nanograms per dry    3-run average (collect   Performance test
 basis).                                standard cubic meter     a minimum volume of 1    (Method 23 at 40 CFR
                                        \b\.                     dry standard cubic       part 60, appendix A-
                                                                 meters).                 7).
Fugitive ash.........................  Visible emissions for    Three 1-hour             Visible emissions test
                                        no more than 5 percent   observation periods.     (Method 22 at 40 CFR
                                        of the hourly                                     part 60, appendix A-
                                        observation period.                               7).
Hydrogen chloride....................  300 parts per million    3-run average (For       Performance test
                                        dry volume.              Method 26, collect a     (Method 26 or 26A at
                                                                 minimum volume of 120    40 CFR part 60,
                                                                 liters per run. For      appendix A-8).
                                                                 Method 26A, collect a
                                                                 minimum volume of 1
                                                                 dry standard cubic
                                                                 meter per run).
Lead.................................  2.1 milligrams per dry   3-run average (collect   Performance test
                                        standard cubic meter.    a minimum volume of 1    (Method 29 at 40 CFR
                                                                 dry standard cubic       part 60, appendix A-
                                                                 meters).                 8). Use ICPMS for the
                                                                                analytical finish.
Mercury..............................  0.0053 milligrams per    3-run average (For       Performance test
                                        dry standard cubic       Method 29 and ASTM       (Method 29 or 30B at
                                        meter.                   D6784-02 (Reapproved     40 CFR part 60,
                                                                 2008),\c\ collect a      appendix A-8) or ASTM
                                                                 minimum volume of 2      D6784-02 (Reapproved
                                                                 dry standard cubic       2008).\c\
                                                                 meters per run. For
                                                                 Method 30B, collect a
                                                                 minimum sample as
                                                                 specified in Method
                                                                 30B at 40 CFR part 60,
                                                                 appendix A).
Oxides of nitrogen...................  190 parts per million    3-run average (for       Performance test
                                        dry volume.              Method 7E, 1 hour        (Method 7 or 7E at 40
                                                                 minimum sample time      CFR part 60, appendix
                                                                 per run).                A-4).
Particulate matter (filterable)......  270 milligrams per dry   3-run average (collect   Performance test
                                        standard cubic meter.    a minimum volume of 1    (Method 5 or 29 at 40
                                                                 dry standard cubic       CFR part 60, appendix
                                                                 meters).                 A-3 or appendix A-8).
Sulfur dioxide.......................  150 parts per million    3-run average (for       Performance test
                                        dry volume.              Method 6, collect a      (Method 6 or 6c at 40
                                                                 minimum of 20 liters     CFR part 60, appendix
                                                                 per run; for Method      A-4).
                                                                 6C, 1 hour minimum
                                                                 sample time per run).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ The date specified in the state plan can be no later than 3 years after the effective date of approval of a
  revised state plan or February 7, 2018.
\b\ All emission limitations (except for opacity) are measured at 7 percent oxygen, dry basis at standard
  conditions. For dioxins/furans, you must meet either the total mass basis limit or the toxic equivalency basis
  limit.
\c\ Incorporated by reference, see Sec.   60.17.

[FR Doc. 2014-29568 Filed 1-20-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 47 (Friday, March 10, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14883-14885]
[FR Doc No: 2023-04946]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2022-0521; Project Identifier MCAI-2022-00273-T;
Amendment 39-22187; AD 2022-20-03]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; MHI RJ Aviation ULC (Type Certificate
Previously Held by Bombardier, Inc.) Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain MHI RJ Aviation ULC Model CL-600-2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700,
701 & 702); CL-600-2C11 (Regional Jet Series 550); CL-600-2D15
(Regional Jet Series 705); CL-600-2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900); and
CL-600-2E25 (Regional Jet Series 1000) airplanes. This AD was prompted
by laboratory tests that showed that the oxygen tubes of the crew
oxygen system may be contaminated with lubricants, as a result of the
manufacturing and cleaning procedures used. This AD requires cleaning
and flushing the crew oxygen system. The FAA is issuing this AD to
address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective April 14, 2023.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of April 14,
2023.

ADDRESSES:
    AD Docket: You may examine the AD docket at regulations.gov under
Docket No. FAA-2022-0521; or in person at Docket Operations between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD
docket contains this final rule, the mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI), any comments received, and other information. The
address for Docket Operations is U.S. Department of Transportation,
Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
    Material Incorporated by Reference:
     For service information identified in this final rule,
contact MHI RJ Aviation Group, Customer Response Center, 3655 Ave. des
Grandes-Tourelles, Suite 110, Boisbriand, Qu[eacute]bec J7H 0E2 Canada;
North America toll-free telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or direct-dial telephone
450-990-7272; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email mhirj.com">[email protected]mhirj.com; website
mhirj.com.
     You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available at
regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2022-0521.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chirayu Gupta, Aerospace Engineer,
Mechanical Systems and Administrative Services Section, FAA, New York
ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain MHI RJ Aviation
ULC Model CL-600-2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700, 701 & 702); CL-600-2C11
(Regional Jet Series 550); CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705); CL-
600-2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900); and CL-600-2E25 (Regional Jet
Series 1000) airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on
May 17, 2022 (87 FR 29841). The NPRM was prompted by AD CF-2022-06,
dated February 28, 2022, issued by Transport Canada Civil Aviation
(TCCA), which is the aviation authority for Canada (referred to after
this as the MCAI). The MCAI states that laboratory tests showed that
the oxygen tubes of the crew oxygen system may be contaminated with
lubricants, as a result of the inadvertent use of a non-conforming
aqueous degreasing process for oxygen line flushing and cleaning during
the manufacturing process. If not corrected, lubricant remaining in
oxygen lines could lead to a fire within the oxygen tubes or a health
hazard related to the inhalation of lubricant fumes through the masks
when masks are in use.
    In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to require cleaning and flushing the
crew oxygen system. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the
contaminated oxygen tubes of the crew oxygen system, which could lead
to a fire within the oxygen tubes, or a health hazard related to the
inhalation of lubricant fumes when the masks are in use.
    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at regulations.gov under
Docket No. FAA-2022-0521.

Discussion of Final Airworthiness Directive

Comments

    The FAA received a comment from MHI RJ Aviation ULC. The following
presents the comment received on the NPRM and the FAA's response to the
comment.

Request To Change MHI RJ Contact Information

    MHI RJ Aviation ULC requested that the NPRM be revised to correct
its contact information.
    The FAA has included the correct contact information under
ADDRESSES in this final rule and in paragraph (k)(3) of this AD.

Conclusion

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to
the FAA's bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, it
has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI
referenced above. The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered the
comments received, and determined that air safety requires adopting
this AD as proposed. Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this AD to address
the unsafe condition on this product. Except for minor editorial
changes, and any other changes described previously, this AD is adopted
as proposed in the NPRM. None of the changes will increase the economic
burden on any operator.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed MHI RJ Service Bulletin 670BA-35-016, Revision B,
dated December 17, 2021. This service information specifies procedures
for low-pressure and high-pressure cleaning of the crew oxygen tubes.
The tasks include cleaning the end fittings and threads, cleaning the
inner wall of the tubes with solvent, and flushing the inner wall of
the tubes with nitrogen.
    This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD would affect 34 airplanes of U.S.
registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Labor cost                    Parts cost           Cost per product        Cost on U.S. operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
51 work-hours x $85 per hour =      Up to $1,240..........  Up to $5,575.........  Up to $189,550.
 $4,335.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements.
Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight
of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for
practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary
for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to
exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have 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.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

The Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13   [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive:

2022-20-03 MHI RJ Aviation ULC (Type Certificate Previously Held by
Bombardier, Inc.): Amendment 39-22187; Docket No. FAA-2022-0521;
Project Identifier MCAI-2022-00273-T.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective April 14, 2023.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to MHI RJ Aviation ULC (Type Certificate
Previously Held by Bombardier, Inc.) airplanes identified in
paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) of this AD, certificated in any
category.
    (1) Model CL-600-2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700, 701 & 702) and
CL-600-2C11 (Regional Jet Series 550) airplanes, serial numbers
10346 and 10347.
    (2) Model CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705) and CL-600-2D24
(Regional Jet Series 900) airplanes, serial numbers 15413 through
15484 inclusive.
    (3) Model CL-600-2E25 (Regional Jet Series 1000) airplanes,
serial numbers 19049 through 19064 inclusive.
    (4) Model CL-600-2C10, CL-600-2C11, CL-600-2D15, CL-600-2D24 and
CL-600-2E25 airplanes equipped with tube part numbers installed
after the dates indicated in Section 1.A.(2) of MHI RJ Service
Bulletin (SB) 670BA-35-016, Revision B, dated December 17, 2021.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 35, Oxygen.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by laboratory tests that showed that the
oxygen tubes of the crew oxygen system may be contaminated with
lubricants, as a result of the manufacturing and cleaning
procedures. The

FAA is proposing this AD to address the contaminated oxygen tubes of
the crew oxygen system, which could lead to a fire within the oxygen
tubes, or a health hazard related to the inhalation of lubricant
fumes when the masks are in use.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Requirements

    Within 8,800 flight hours after the effective date of this AD,
clean and flush the crew oxygen system, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of MHI RJ Service Bulletin 670BA-35-016,
Revision B, dated December 17, 2021.

(h) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for actions required by this AD,
if those actions were performed before the effective date of this
AD, using the service information identified in paragraph (h)(1) or
(2) of this AD.
    (1) MHI RJ Service Bulletin 670BA-35-016, dated February 26,
2021.
    (2) MHI RJ Service Bulletin 670BA-35-016, Revision A, dated
November 5, 2021.

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this
AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In
accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal
inspector or responsible Flight Standards Office, as appropriate. If
sending information directly to the manager of the certification
office, send it to ATTN: Program Manager, Continuing Operational
Safety, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410,
Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>. Before using any
approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or
lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the responsible Flight
Standards Office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO
Branch, FAA; or Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA); or MHI RJ
Aviation ULC's TCCA Design Approval Organization (DAO). If approved
by the DAO, the approval must include the DAO-authorized signature.

(j) Additional Information

    (1) Refer to TCCA AD CF-2022-06, dated February 28, 2022, for
related information. This TCCA AD may be found in the AD docket at
regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2022-0521.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Chirayu Gupta,
Aerospace Engineer, Mechanical Systems and Administrative Services
Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410,
Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of the service information listed in this
paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) MHI RJ Service Bulletin 670BA-35-016, Revision B, dated
December 17, 2021.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact MHI
RJ Aviation Group, Customer Response Center, 3655 Ave. des Grandes-
Tourelles, Suite 110, Boisbriand, Qu[eacute]bec J7H 0E2 Canada;
North America toll-free telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or direct-dial
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email mhirj.com">[email protected]mhirj.com;
website mhirj.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability
of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, email [email protected], or go to: www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on September 13, 2022.
Christina Underwood,
Acting Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.

    Editorial Note: This document was received for publication by
the Office of the Federal Register on March 7, 2023.
[FR Doc. 2023-04946 Filed 3-9-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


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

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

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

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

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

MEMORANDUM

DATE:		December 31, 2012

SUBJECT:	Human Toxicology Scoping Document for the Registration Review of Gibberellins.

				Registration Review Case #: 	4110
				PC Code: 					043801, 043802 and 116902
				CAS #:						77-06-5, 125-67-7 and 8030-53-3, respectively
				Chemical Class: 				Biochemicals

FROM:		Angela L. Gonzales, Biologist 	/s/
            Biochemical Pesticides Branch
            Biopesticides & Pollution Prevention Division (7511P)

TO:			Leonard Cole, Senior Regulatory Specialist
				Biochemical Pesticides Branch
            Biopesticides & Pollution Prevention Division (7511P)

ACTION REQUESTED

In support of the development of the Final Workplan for Registration Review, the following scoping document contains the human health assessment for the following biopesticide active ingredients: 1) gibberellic acid; 2) gibberellic acid, monopotassium salt; and 3) gibberellin A4 mixture with gibberellin A7.

Executive Summary

All human health assessment data requirements under 40 CFR 158.2050 have been fulfilled for the active ingredients.  Since the last registration review of these active ingredients, the Agency has received some additional mammalian toxicology data for which Agency reviews could not be located. Also, according to the Agency's Incident Data System, there have been reports of human incidents resulting from the use of pesticide products containing gibberellic acid as the active ingredient. During the course of registration review, the Agency will review of all of these data and determine if a reevaluation of the current risk assessments is warranted.

I. Background

Gibberellic Acid (A3)

As a pesticide, gibberellic acid is a plant growth regulator (PGR) used to promote flowering and elongation of stems and roots and to stimulate fruit growth and maturation. The chemical naturally occurs in plants and in some microbes. (Gibberellins Fact Sheet, 2001)

The chemical was first registered by the Agency in 1971. There are currently 65 registered products containing the active ingredient; 35 products contain gibberellic acid as the sole active ingredient, 29 products contain the chemical along with one or more other plant growth regulators and 1 product contains the chemical and a microbial active ingredient. There are 10 manufacturing-use products (MPs) and 55 end-use products (EPs) that contain gibberellic acid as an active ingredient.

Gibberellic Acid, Monopotassium Salt

Currently, there are no pesticide products registered by the Agency containing this active ingredient, thus a review of the available data and risk assessments will not be conducted for this chemical.

Gibberellin A4 Mixture with Gibberellin A7

Gibberellin A4 (GA4) and gibberellin A7 (GA7) are isomers of gibberellic acid and thus are significantly similar in structure and function. The mixture of the two gibberellins is used as a PGR in pesticide formulations for the same purposes as GA3.

The GA4 and GA7 mixture was first registered by the Agency in 1994. There are currently 14 registered products containing the active ingredients; 7 products contain the mixture as the sole active ingredient and 7 products contain the mixture along with one or more other PGRs. There are 2 MPs.

II. Tolerances

40 CFR § 180.1098   Gibberellins [Gibberellic Acids (GA3 and GA4 + GA7), and Sodium or Potassium Gibberellate]; exemption from the requirement of a tolerance.

An exemption from the requirement of a tolerance is established for residues of gibberellins [gibberellic acids (GA3 and GA4 + GA7), and sodium or potassium gibberellate] in or on all food commodities when used as plant regulators on plants, seeds, or cuttings and on all food commodities after harvest in accordance with good agricultural practices.  [64 FR 31505, June 11, 1999]

III. Incidents

Gibberellic Acid (A3)

According to the Incident Data System, there have been six reports of human incidents resulting from the use of pesticide products containing GA3 as the active ingredient. During the course of registration review, the Agency will conduct an assessment of the incident data to determine if the current risk assessments will need to be reevaluated.

Gibberellin A4 Mixture with Gibberellin A7

According to the Incident Data System, there have been no reports of incidents resulting from the use of pesticide products containing GA4 and GA7 mixture as the active ingredient.

IV. Toxicity Profile

Because GA3 and the GA4 and GA7 mixture are significantly similar in structure and function, they are considered collectively in the toxicity assessment. Sufficient data have been provided to fulfill the biochemical pesticide data requirements under 40 CFR 158.2050 for the current use patterns for the active ingredients. The data available to the Agency are summarized in Table 1 below. Several mutagenicity studies and a skin sensitization study have been submitted to the Agency since the last review of these active ingredients. The reviews of these studies were not able to be located, thus they will be reviewed during the course of registration review.

Table 1. Human Health Assessment Data Requirements for Gibberellins (40 CFR § 158.2050)
                           Study/OCSPP Guideline No.
                                    Results
                         Toxicity Category/Description
                                     MRID
                           Acute oral toxicity (rat)
                                  (870.1100)
                          LD50 > 5,000 mg/kg (GA3)
                                      IV
                                   44081306

                  LD50 > 5,000 mg/kg (GA4 and GA7 mixture)
                                      IV
                                   40873201

                  LD50 > 5,000 mg/kg (GA4 and GA7 mixture)
                                      IV
                                   44264705
                        Acute dermal toxicity (rabbit)
                                  (870.1200)
                        LD50 > 2,000 mg/kg[1] (GA3)
                                      III
                                   44081307

                LD50 > 2,000 mg/kg[1] (GA4 and GA7 mixture)
                                      III
                                   40873202

                LD50 > 2,000 mg/kg[1] (GA4 and GA7 mixture)
                                      III
                                   44264706
                       Acute inhalation toxicity	 (rat)
                                  (870.1300)
                           LC50 > 4.94 mg/L (GA3)
                                      IV
                                   44081308

                 LC50 > 2.98 mg/L[2] (GA4 and GA7 mixture)
                                      III
                                   40873203

                   LC50 > 5.44 mg/L (GA4 and GA7 mixture)
                                      IV
                                   44264707
                        Primary eye irritation (rabbit)
                                  (870.2400)
             Mildly irritating-effects cleared within 7 days (GA3)
                                      III
                                   44081309

   Moderately irritating-effects cleared within 7 days (GA4 and GA7 mixture)
                                      III
                                   40873204

     Mildly irritating-effects cleared within 7 days (GA4 and GA7 mixture)
                                      III
                                   44264708
                      Primary dermal irritation (rabbit)
                                  (870.2500)
                             Non-irritating (GA3)
                                      IV
                                   44081310

                     Non-irritating (GA4 and GA7 mixture)
                                      IV
                                   40873205

                     Non-irritating (GA4 and GA7 mixture)
                                      IV
                                   44264709
                       Dermal sensitization (guinea pig)
                                  (870.2600)
                            Not a sensitizer (GA3)

                                   44081311

                   Mildly sensitizing (GA4 and GA7 mixture)

                                   40873206

                    Not a sensitizer (GA4 and GA7 mixture)

                                   44264710
                             90-Day oral toxicity
                                  (870.3100)
NOAEL = 10,000 ppm in rats
LOAEL = 25,000 ppm based on alterations in clinical chemistry, decreased food consumption, decreased body weight, increases in relative organ weights (brain, kidney and testis) and gross and histopathological changes in the kidney (GA4 and GA7 mixture)

                                   41616601

NOAEL = 10,000 ppm in rats
LOAEL = 50,000 ppm based on occurrence of soft stools in both males and females, increased blood urea nitrogen (BUN) levels and increased liver and kidney weights in females. (GA3)

                                   41617501

NOAEL = 600 mg/kg/day in male dogs, 1,000 mg/kg/day in female dogs
LOAEL = 1,000 mg/kg/day in males based on a reduction in body weight gain and food efficiency, increased liver weight and gross and histopathological changes in the thymus and adrenal glands.

                                   45695901
                            90-Day dermal toxicity
                                  (870.3250)
Waived. Products containing the active ingredients are not purposefully applied to the skin and prolonged exposure is not anticipated based on the active ingredients' use pattern as PGRs.

                          90-Day inhalation toxicity
                                  (870.3465)
Waived. Significant repeated inhalation exposure as a gas, vapor or aerosol is not expected based on the use pattern of the active ingredients.

                                 Mutagenicity
                  (Bacterial reverse mutation test; 870.5100)
Not mutagenic under the conditions of the studies (GA3 and GA4  and GA7 mixture)

                                   40261601
                                   40873207
                                   44264711
                                 Mutagenicity
           (Unscheduled DNA synthesis in mammalian cells; 870.5550)
Not mutagenic under the conditions of the studies. (GA3 and GA4  and GA7 mixture)

                                   40261603
                                   40873209
                                 Mutagenicity
          (In vivo mammalian erythrocyte micronucleus test; 870.5395)
Not mutagenic under the conditions of the study. (GA4 and GA7 mixture)

                                   40873208
                                 Mutagenicity
            (In vitro mammalian cell gene mutation test; 870.5300)
Not mutagenic under the conditions of the study. (GA4 and GA7 mixture)

                                   44264712
                                 Mutagenicity
           (In vitro mammalian chromosome aberration test; 870.5375
Evidence of clastogenic activity observed at >= 1,000 ug/ml without S9 activation and at >= 2,000 ug/ml with S9 activation.[3] (GA4 and GA7 mixture)

                                   44264713
                            Developmental toxicity
                                  (870.3700)
Maternal NOAEL > 1,000 mg/kg/day[1] in rats. Developmental NOAEL is not available. (GA3)

                                   40155201
                                   40746801

Maternal and developmental NOAEL = 300 mg/kg/day in rabbits.
Maternal and developmental LOAEL = 1,000 mg/kg/day based on increased mortality, increased abortion rates, clinical signs of toxicity and gross pathological observations (GA4 and GA7 mixture)

                                   41143201
[1]Highest dose tested.
[2]Highest respirable dose achieved.
[3]Although clastogenic activity was observed in this in vitro study, the active ingredients are considered not likely to be mutagenic. This conclusion is based on the negative results observed in all of the other mutagenicity studies, one of which was an in vivo study.

VI. References

U.S. EPA Biochemical Fact Sheet for Gibberellins. Issued January, 2001. <http://www.epa.gov/opp00001/chem_search/reg_actions/registration/fs_G-106_01-Jan-01.pdf>

cc:  A. L. Gonzales, L. Cole, BPPD Science Review File, IHAD/ARS
 	  A. L. Gonzales, FT, PY-S: 12/31/12


Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection submitted a CD as
part of its SIP Revision package.  The CD contained E-mail comments on
proposed amendments to 310 CMR 7.36 in Microsoft Office “Outlook”
format.

Files are available electronically from the EPA New England Regional
Office, and Massachusetts DEP.  A copy of the CD’s file index is
provided below:

Folder: Transit Reg Comments Emails

File Name	Size	Type	Last Modified

Comment Letter to DEP 1-13-06 5PM  .msg 	96KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 2:12 PM

Transit Plan Comments.msg 	27KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

State set to endorse 3 railway projects.msg 	23KB	MSG File	12/1/2006
1:27 PM

Commuter rail service.msg 	29KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Transit project.msg 	30KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Transit Commitment Projects.msg 	22KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Red-Blue connector.msg 	24KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Re  the article about transit.msg 	26KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Public Transportation comments.msg 	25KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

MBTA Transit Lines.msg 	27KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

MBTA Environmental Changes.msg 	31KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

in support of Green Line extension.msg 	25KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

green line to  W  Medford.msg 	23KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Extending the Green Line to Forest Hills.msg 	37KB	MSG File	12/1/2006
1:27 PM

Comment re  Transit Commitments.msg 	27KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

comment on transit changes.msg 	27KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Sip comment letter.msg 	76KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Replacement comment letter on SIP revision.msg 	138KB	MSG File	12/1/2006
1:27 PM

RE  Extension of Public Comment Period.msg 	37KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27
PM

RE   Green Line Extention.msg 	29KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

No Green line in West Medford.msg 	25KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

mbta.msg 	46KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

green line extension (93).msg 	25KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Fw  Testimony David White Re  12 21DEP Hrg Amend 310CMR7 36.msg 	52KB
MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Commentary on Proposed Changes In Big Dig Transit Improvements.msg 	35KB
MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Christine  Help Improve Air Quality and Public Transit in Boston.msg
58KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

American with Disabilities Act---Confidential.msg 	30KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (92).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (91).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (90).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (89).msg 	26KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (88).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (87).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (86).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (85).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (84).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (83).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (82).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (81).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (80).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (79).msg 	26KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (78).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (77).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (76).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (75).msg 	28KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (74).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (73).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (72).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (71).msg 	26KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (70).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (69).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (68).msg 	26KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (67).msg 	26KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (66).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (65).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (64).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (63).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (62).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (61).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (60).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (59).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (58).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (57).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (56).msg 	26KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (55).msg 	29KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (54).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (53).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (52).msg 	26KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (51).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (50).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (49).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (48).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (47).msg 	26KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (46).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (45).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (44).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (43).msg 	26KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (42).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (41).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (40).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (39).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (38).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Somreville Green Line Extension .msg 	30KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (37).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (36).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (35).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (34).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (33).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (32).msg 	26KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (31).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (30).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (29).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

green line extension to Union Square.msg 	26KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27
PM

Green Line Extension (28).msg 	22KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Fwd somartscouncil Somerville Green Line Extension is not a done deal

              yet please attend send comments.msg 	58KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Union Square Green Line extension.msg 	25KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Senator Barrios' Comments re  SIP amendments  310 CMR 7 36.msg 	135KB
MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

In support of Green Line extention - please modify the Ozone SIP.msg
27KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (27).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (26).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (25).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Green Line Union Square.msg 	22KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Extension of Green Line to Union Square.msg 	33KB	MSG File	12/1/2006
1:27 PM

extend the Green Line!.msg 	23KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Expansion of the Green Line.msg 	25KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

BRING THE GREEN LINE TO UNION SQUARE SOMERVILLE.msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

somerville green line (22).msg 	23KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Please implement the Green Line Extension ASAP (with Bike path
extension).msg 	26KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (24).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (23).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (20).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (19).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (18).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Green Line Extension to Somerville Medford.msg 	24KB	MSG File	12/1/2006
1:27 PM

Green Line extension support.msg 	29KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Green Line extension (21).msg 	22KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Abandoned  Big Dig  Transit Commitments.msg 	42KB	MSG File	12/1/2006
1:27 PM

Somerville needs the Extension of the Green Line.msg 	31KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Somerville Green Line.msg 	31KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Somerville Green Line (16).msg 	29KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Somerville & the Green  Line.msg 	27KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

RE Green Line Extentions.msg 	25KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

re  restoration of Arborway Green Line.msg 	35KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27
PM

GreenLine Expansion Somerville  MA  .msg 	25KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27
PM

E Line Restoration.msg 	27KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

DEP Contacts on Air Quality Technical Issues.msg 	39KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Arborway trolley restoration .msg 	26KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Arborway Green Line Restoration.msg 	24KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Arborway Green Line Restoration (17).msg 	25KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27
PM

Untitled (14).msg 	1,098KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Testimony re  green line extension.msg 	53KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I support restoration of the Arborway Line.msg 	31KB	MSG File	12/1/2006
1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (15).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Green Line extension in Union Square  Somerville.msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Comments on changes to the Ozone State Implementation Plan (SIP).msg
39KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Somerville Green Line Extension.msg 	27KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (13).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (12).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (11).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Comments on amendments to 310 CMR 7 36  Transit System  Improvements.msg
	35KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

State Implementation Plan.msg 	26KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (9).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (8).msg 	24KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (7).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (6).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments (5).msg 	25KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Green Line extension into Medford  comments.msg 	41KB	MSG File	12/1/2006
1:27 PM

Green Line extension (10).msg 	29KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Comment on Green Line extension to Somerville and Medford.msg 	32KB	MSG
File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

I Oppose Changes to the Transit Commitments.msg 	25KB	MSG File	12/1/2006
1:27 PM

Comments on 310 CMR 7 36 Transit System Improvements.msg 	61KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Arborway project (green line).msg 	3,667KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Transit Commitments.msg 	38KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Red Blue Line Connector.msg 	28KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

red blue connector.msg 	26KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Red   blue line.msg 	27KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Red   Blue Line connector.msg 	24KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

RE  Dropping the Red Blue Connector.msg 	51KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Proposed Changes to Transit Commitments from CA T Project.msg 	225KB	MSG
File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

MBTA substitute projects  amendments to 310 CMR 7 36.msg 	35KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Green Line extensions.msg 	23KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

FW  SIP comment letter.msg 	135KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

DO NOT drop the Blue REd connection.msg 	29KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

310 CMR 7 36.msg 	49KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Transit System Improvements  amendments 310 CMR 7 36.msg 	31KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Testimony for 12  21 05 Public Hearing on Ozone SIP Transit
Commitments.msg 	27KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Red-Blue Line Connector.msg 	31KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Public comment arborway line.msg 	45KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Proposed Amendments To 310 CMR 7 36 (4).msg 	123KB	MSG File	12/1/2006
1:27 PM

Green Line Union Sq .msg 	24KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

green line in Somerville.msg 	25KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Green Line Extension in Union Sq .msg 	25KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Comments regarding SIP Changes.msg 	42KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Cambridge City Councilor Craig Kelley's Objections to Proposed Changes

               to MBTA's Red-Blue Connector.msg 	62KB	MSG File	12/1/2006
1:27 PM

Approve of Green Line.msg 	24KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Untitled.msg 	32KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

trolleys in JP are not the answer.msg 	25KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

STEP .msg 	22KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Red-Blue Connection.msg 	27KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Ozone SIP Comment from Somerville.msg 	58KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Ozone SIP  Transit Commitments  Comments.msg 	34KB	MSG File	12/1/2006
1:27 PM

Honor your commitment to build the Green Line.msg 	23KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

green line extension (2).msg 	23KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Green Line commitment.msg 	44KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

DEP  Please approve the Green Line extension!.msg 	29KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Comments on Proposed Green Line Extension  Amendments to the State

                 Implementation Plan for Ozone  .msg 	59KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Comments on Proposed Amendments to 310 CMR 7 36 (3).msg 	31KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Comments on amendments to 310 CMR 7 36.msg 	37KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27
PM

SIP Ozone Public Comment Letter - 310 CMR 7 36.msg 	38KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Please support the Green Line extension to Medford and Somerville.msg
29KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Leader Byron Rushing's testimony on  proposed amendments by DEP.msg
89KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Green Line Extension into Somerville.msg 	27KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27
PM

Green Line Comments for Ozone SIP.msg 	30KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Comments on Proposed Amendments to 310 CMR 7 36.msg 	78KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

COMMENTS ON 310 CMR 7 36  Transit System  Improvements .msg 	45KB	MSG
File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Comments from the Massachusetts Smart Growth Alliance.msg 	1,713KB	MSG
File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Proposed amendments to 310 CMR 7 36.msg 	455KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27
PM

My comments to MA DEP regarding the SIP commitment to build Green

                   Line Extension through Somerville.msg 	39KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Green Line extension (1).msg 	22KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Green line ext to Somerville.msg 	25KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

from Fred Salvucci.msg 	67KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Comment regarding 310 CMR 7 36 (Central Artery Tunnel
mitigationprojects).msg 	25KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

City of Boston SIP Comments.msg 	257KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:27 PM

Green Line through Somerville.msg 	24KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:26 PM

Green Line in Union Square Somerville.msg 	55KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:26
PM

Green Line Comments.msg 	64KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:26 PM

EPA's Comment on Proposed Amendments to the Transit System

                    Improvement Regs 310 CMR 7 36.msg 	303KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:26 PM

CLF SIP comment ltr 1-17-06.msg 	208KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:26 PM

Association for Public Transportation response to 310

                     CMR 7 36  amendments.msg 	64KB	MSG File	12/1/2006
1:26 PM

Transit Commitments  Ozone SIP.msg 	64KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:26 PM

Testimony.msg 	66KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:26 PM

Submission of documents.msg 	357KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:26 PM

MAPC SIP Commitments.msg 	68KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:26 PM

Green-Line Commitment.msg 	43KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:26 PM

Green Line Beyond Lechmere.msg 	71KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:26 PM

Comments on proposed transit air quality revision .msg 	29KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:26 PM

1 17 06 Testimony.msg 	124KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:26 PM

short comment in favor the green line extension to Union Square.msg
26KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:26 PM

RE  Red Blue Line Connector .msg 	52KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:26 PM

public comment Green Line extension.msg 	31KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:26 PM

Please keep Green Line on track to Medford!.msg 	35KB	MSG File	12/1/2006
1:26 PM

letter on Transit Commitments  Ozone SIP from Somerville Bike
Committee.msg 	55KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:26 PM

Green line extension.msg 	28KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:26 PM

Fw  Comments on Proposed Green Line Extension Amendments

                         to the State Implementation Plan for O3.msg
44KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:26 PM

fairmont line comment.msg 	31KB	MSG File	12/1/2006 1:26 PM

Extend Green Line to Medford  and past Union Square.msg 	26KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:26 PM

Restore the E-Line Arborway Line to Forest Hills .msg 	35KB	MSG File
12/1/2006 1:26 PM


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 220 (Monday, November 16, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70772-70773]
[FR Doc No: 2015-29151]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Notice of Petition for Enforcement

Allco Renewable Energy Limited...  Docket Nos. EL16-11-000
Allco Finance Limited............  QF14-109-001
                                   QF14-114-001
                                   QF14-115-001
                                   QF14-116-001
                                   QF15-117-001

    Take notice that on November 9, 2015, Allco Renewable Energy
Limited and Allco Finance Limited (collectively, ALLCO) filed a
Petition for Enforcement, pursuant to section 210(h)(2)(B) of the
Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (PURPA), requesting that
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) exercise its
authority and initiate enforcement action against the Connecticut
Department of Energy and Environmental Protection and the Connecticut
Public Utilities Regulatory Authority (collectively, the Connecticut
Agencies) to remedy the Connecticut Agencies' implementation of PURPA.
ALLCO asserts that the Connecticut Agencies' implementation is improper
and outside the confines of PURPA, all as more fully explained in the
petition.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). 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. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.

The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for electronic 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 email notification when a document is added to a subscribed
docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on November 30, 2015.

    Dated: November 9, 2015.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-29151 Filed 11-13-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P