[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 71 (Wednesday, April 13, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21752-21756]
[FR Doc No: 2016-08512]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0382; FRL-9944-34]

Acequinocyl; Pesticide Tolerances

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation increases an existing tolerance for residues
of acequinocyl in or on ``Hop, dried cones.'' Arysta LifeScience
requested this tolerance increase under the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

DATES: This regulation is effective April 13, 2016. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before June 13, 2016, and
must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR
part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0382, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Please review the visitor instructions and
additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

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

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

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

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

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

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

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0382 in the subject line on the first
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must
be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before
June 13, 2016. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections and

hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for
inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without
prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing
request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0382, by one of
the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.

Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance

    In the Federal Register of September 9, 2015 (80 FR 54257) (FRL-
9933-26), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP
5F8364) by Arysta LifeScience North America Corp., 15401 Weston Pkwy.,
Suite 150, Cary, NC 27513. The petition requested to amend the
tolerance in 40 CFR 180.599 for residues of the insecticide acequinocyl
in or on hop, dried cones from 4.0 parts per million (ppm) to 15.0 ppm.
That document referenced a summary of the petition prepared by Arysta
LifeScience, the registrant, which is available in the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received in response to the
notice of filing.

III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a
food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure.
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and
children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. . .
.''
    Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), and the factors
specified in FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the available
scientific data and other relevant information in support of this
action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a
determination on aggregate exposure for acequinocyl including exposure
resulting from the tolerance established by this action. EPA's
assessment of exposures and risks associated with acequinocyl follows.

A. Toxicological Profile

    EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children.
    The absorption, metabolism, distribution, and excretion (ADME) of
acequinocyl are well characterized. Acequinocyl exhibits marginal
absorption into the plasma (13-16% for the 10 mg/kg low dose and 8-9%
for the 500 mg/kg high dose) and relatively rapid and complete
excretion (24 hours for the low dose and 72 hours for the high dose),
primarily via the bile and feces (82.6%) in rats. Acequinocyl undergoes
nearly complete metabolism to hydrolysis products and a glucuronide
conjugate. There was no evidence for selective tissue accumulation or
sequestration.
    Across species, durations and routes of exposure (oral and dermal),
the primary effects in the acequinocyl hazard database are indicative
of toxicity to the liver (hepatocyte vacuolization, brown pigmented
cells and perivascular inflammatory cells in liver) and hematopoietic
system (hemorrhage, increased clotting factor times and increased
platelet counts). In an acute neurotoxicity study, there were no
effects up to the limit dose (2,000 mg/kg). In a guideline
immunotoxicity study, there were also no effects up to the highest dose
tested (45 mg/kg/day). In rats and rabbits, there was no evidence of
increased quantitative or qualitative fetal susceptibility with
clinical signs and gross necropsy findings seen in maternal animals at
similar or lower doses than those producing resorptions. In the rat 2-
generation reproductive toxicity study, offspring effects at the mid-
and high-doses consisted of swollen body parts, protruding eyes,
clinical signs, delays in pupil development, and increased mortality
occurring mainly after weaning, however these effects were observed at
the same doses as parental effects, and a clear NOAEL was established
which is being used in endpoint selection. There were no effects on
reproductive parameters. There was no concern for genotoxicity or
mutagenicity. There was no evidence of carcinogenic potential in either
the rat or mouse carcinogenicity studies, or in the genotoxicity and
mutagenicity studies indicating that acequinocyl is ``not likely'' to
be carcinogenic to humans.
    Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by acequinocyl as well as the no-observed-
adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-
level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at http://www.regulations.gov in the document titled ``May 27, 2015: Acequinocyl.
Human Health Assessment Scoping Document in Support of Registration
Review'' on page 15 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0203.

B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern

    Once a pesticide's toxicological profile is determined, EPA
identifies toxicological points of departure (POD) and levels of
concern to use in evaluating the risk posed by human exposure to the
pesticide. For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, the toxicological POD is used as the basis for
derivation of reference values for risk assessment. PODs are developed
based on a careful analysis of the doses in each toxicological study to
determine the dose at which no adverse effects are observed (the NOAEL)
and the lowest dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified
(the LOAEL). Uncertainty/safety factors are used in conjunction with
the POD to calculate a safe exposure level--generally referred to as a
population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a

reference dose (RfD)--and a safe margin of exposure (MOE). For non-
threshold risks, the Agency assumes that any amount of exposure will
lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the Agency estimates risk in terms
of the probability of an occurrence of the adverse effect expected in a
lifetime. For more information on the general principles EPA uses in
risk characterization and a complete description of the risk assessment
process, see http://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/assessing-human-health-risk-pesticides.
    A summary of the toxicological endpoints for acequinocyl used for
human risk assessment is discussed in Unit III. B. of the final rule
published in the Federal Register of May 2, 2012 (77 FR 25904) (FRL-
9346-4).

C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to acequinocyl, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-
for tolerances as well as all existing acequinocyl tolerances in 40 CFR
180.599. EPA assessed dietary exposures from acequinocyl in food as
follows:
    i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk
assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological
study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring
as a result of a 1-day or single exposure.
    No such effects were identified in the toxicological studies for
acequinocyl; therefore, a quantitative acute dietary exposure
assessment is unnecessary.
    ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used 2003-2008 food consumption data from the U.S.
Department of Agriculture's (USDA's) National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey, What We Eat in America, (NHANES/WWEIA). Tolerance-
level residues, Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model (DEEM) ver. 7.76
default processing factors, and 100 percent crop treated (PCT) data
were used in the chronic dietary assessment.
    iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that acequinocyl does not pose a cancer risk to humans.
Therefore, a dietary exposure assessment for the purpose of assessing
cancer risk is unnecessary.
    iv. Anticipated residue and PCT information. EPA did not use
anticipated residue or PCT information in the dietary assessment for
acequinocyl. Tolerance level residues and 100 PCT were assumed for all
food commodities.
    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for acequinocyl in drinking water. These simulation models
take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of acequinocyl. Further information regarding EPA
drinking water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be
found at http://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/about-water-exposure-models-used-pesticide.
    Based on the Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling
System (PRZM/EXAMS) and Screening Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-
GROW) models, the estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of
acequinocyl for chronic exposure assessments are estimated to be 6.69
parts per billion (ppb) for surface water and 3.6 x 10-3 ppb
for ground water.
    Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. For the chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of value 6.69 ppb was used to
assess the contribution to drinking water.
    3. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is
used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary
exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control,
termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets). Acequinocyl is
currently registered for the following uses that could result in
residential exposures: use on landscape ornamentals in and around
residences, businesses, public property, schools, interiorscapes, and
other non-production areas. EPA assessed residential exposure using the
following assumptions: Adult short-term residential handler dermal and
inhalation exposure is anticipated from adults applying acequinocyl to
trees and ornamentals with handheld equipment. Adult and youth (6-11
years old) short-term post-application dermal exposure to acequinocyl
is anticipated after application to trees and ornamentals. The dermal
handler and post-application residential exposures were not included in
the short-term aggregate assessment because different effects were seen
in the route-specific dermal study compared to the effects seen in the
oral studies used to select the oral and inhalation points of
departure. Further information regarding EPA standard assumptions and
generic inputs for residential exposures may be found at http://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/standard-operating-procedures-residential-pesticide.
    4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
    EPA has not found acequinocyl to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and acequinocyl does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
acequinocyl does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other
substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which
chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's Web site at http://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/cumulative-assessment-risk-pesticides.

D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

    1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10x) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the Food Quality
Protection Act (FQPA) Safety Factor (SF). In applying this provision,
EPA either retains the default value of 10x, or uses a different
additional safety factor when reliable data available to EPA support
the choice of a different factor.
    2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. In rats and rabbits, there
was no evidence of increased quantitative or qualitative fetal
susceptibility with clinical signs and gross necropsy findings seen in
maternal animals at similar or lower doses than those producing
resorptions. In the rat 2-generation reproductive toxicity study,
offspring effects at the mid- and high-doses consisted of swollen body
parts, protruding eyes, clinical signs, delays in pupil development,
and increased mortality occurring mainly after weaning, however these
effects were

observed at the same doses as parental effects, and a clear NOAEL was
established which is being used in endpoint selection. There were no
effects on reproductive parameters.
    3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show the
safety of infants and children would be adequately protected if the
FQPA SF were reduced to 1x. That decision is based on the following
findings:
    i. The toxicity database for acequinocyl is complete.
    ii. There is no indication that acequinocyl is a neurotoxic
chemical and there is no need for a developmental neurotoxicity study
or additional UFs to account for neurotoxicity.
    iii. There is no evidence that acequinocyl results in increased
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal
developmental studies. In the rat two-generation reproductive toxicity
study, offspring effects were observed at the same doses as parental
effects, and a clear NOAEL was established which is being used in
endpoint selection.
    iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based
on 100 PCT and tolerance-level residues. EPA made conservative
(protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water modeling used
to assess exposure to acequinocyl in drinking water. EPA used similarly
conservative assumptions to assess post-application exposure of
children. These assessments will not underestimate the exposure and
risks posed by acequinocyl.

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

    EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide
exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the
acute PAD (aPAD) and chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer risks, EPA
calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term
risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate food, water,
and residential exposure to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an
adequate MOE exists.
    1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk assessment takes into
account acute exposure estimates from dietary consumption of food and
drinking water. No adverse effect resulting from a single oral exposure
was identified and no acute dietary endpoint was selected. Therefore,
acequinocyl is not expected to pose an acute risk.
    2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
acequinocyl from food and water will utilize 60% of the cPAD for
children 1-2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest
exposure. Based on the explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding
residential use patterns, chronic residential exposure to residues of
acequinocyl is not expected.
    3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into
account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level). Acequinocyl
is currently registered for uses that could result in short-term
residential exposure, and the Agency has determined that it is
appropriate to aggregate chronic exposure through food and water with
short-term residential exposures to acequinocyl.
    Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for short-
term exposures, EPA has concluded the combined short-term food, water,
and residential exposures result in an aggregate MOE of 22,000 for
adults 20-49 years old. Because EPA's level of concern for acequinocyl
is a MOE of 100 or below, this MOE is not of concern.
    4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure
level).
    An intermediate-term adverse effect was identified; however,
acequinocyl is not registered for any use patterns that would result in
intermediate-term residential exposure. Intermediate-term risk is
assessed based on intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
dietary exposure. Because there is no intermediate-term residential
exposure and chronic dietary exposure has already been assessed under
the appropriately protective cPAD (which is at least as protective as
the POD used to assess intermediate-term risk), no further assessment
of intermediate-term risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the chronic
dietary risk assessment for evaluating intermediate-term risk for
acequinocyl.
    5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity
studies, acequinocyl is not expected to pose a cancer risk to humans.
    6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to acequinocyl residues.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    Adequate enforcement methodology (high-performance liquid
chromatography methods with tandem mass-spectroscopy detection (HPLC/
MS/MS)) is available to enforce the tolerance expression.
    The method may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry
Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD
20755-5350; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
B. International Residue Limits

    In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations
Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food
standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain
the reasons for departing from the Codex level.
    The Codex has not established an MRL for acequinocyl on hops.

V. Conclusion

    Therefore, the existing tolerance for residues of acequinocyl,
including its metabolites and degradates, in or on ``Hop, dried cones''
is increased from 4.0 ppm to 15 ppm.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action establishes tolerances under FFDCA section 408(d) in
response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and
Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this action has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this action is not
subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or
Executive Order 13045, entitled ``Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997). This action does not contain any information collections subject
to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.), nor does it require any special considerations under
Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerance in this
final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
    This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this action. In addition, this
action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded
mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
    This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).

VII. Congressional Review Act

    Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.),
EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required
information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of
the rule in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule''
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: April 7, 2016.
Daniel J. Rosenblatt,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

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

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

0
2. In Sec.  180.599, revise the entry for ``Hop, dried cones'' in the
table in paragraph (a) to read as follows:

Sec.  180.599  Acequinocyl; tolerances for residues.

    (a) * * *

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

                                * * * * *
Hop, dried cones...........................................          15

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

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016-08512 Filed 4-12-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 212 (Tuesday, November 3, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67822-67826]
[FR Doc No: 2015-27911]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-76290; File No. SR-NYSE-2015-49]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
Amending Rule 123D To Specify That Exchange Systems May Open One or
More Securities Electronically if a Designated Market Maker Registered
in a Security or Securities Cannot Facilitate the Opening of Trading as
Required by Exchange Rules

October 28, 2015.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on October 16, 2015, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the
Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments
on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 123D to specify that Exchange
systems may open one or more securities electronically if a Designated
Market Maker registered in a security or securities cannot facilitate
the opening of trading as required by Exchange rules. The text of the
proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at
www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the
Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization
included

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 123D to specify that Exchange
systems may open one or more securities electronically if a Designated
Market Maker (``DMM'') registered in a security or securities cannot
facilitate the open of trading as required by Exchange rules.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The proposed amendment contemplates that a DMM's inability
to open securities either manually or electronically would be
related to business continuity disruptions such as the physical
closing of the Exchange Trading Floor or equipment and connectivity
breakdowns that prevent the DMM from opening a security either
manually or electronically. When a DMM is unable to open securities
manually or electronically, the DMM's affirmative obligations under
Rule 104 would not apply.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, Rule 123D provides that openings may be effected
manually or electronically. However, the current rule contemplates that
openings would be facilitated by a DMM, as provided for in Rule
104(a)(2). The Exchange proposes to re-number Rule 123D to provide that
current Rule 123D(1) would be re-numbered as Rule 123D(a), and the
heading would be amended to be referred to as ``Openings.'' \4\
Proposed Rule 123D(a)(1) would include the current first paragraph of
Rule 123D(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Exchange would also delete the terms ``Delayed'' and
``Halts in trading'' from the current Rule 123D(1) heading. The
Exchange further proposes to add a new sub-paragraph (b) to Rule
123D, before the current second paragraph of Rule 123D(1), which
would be named ``Delayed Openings/Halts in Trading.'' The Exchange
proposes further non-substantive amendments to re-number current
Rule 123D(2) as 123D(c) and Rule 123D(4) as Rule 123D(d). As
discussed below, the Exchange proposes to delete current Rule
123D(3) and related Supplementary Material .24.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to add a new paragraph (a)(2) to Rule 123D to
provide that, if a DMM cannot facilitate the open of trading for one or
more securities for which the DMM is registered, the Exchange would
open those securities electronically on a quote or a trade as provided
for in paragraphs (a)(3)-(a)(6) of the proposed Rule. Proposed Rule
123D(a)(2) would further provide that manually-entered Floor interest
would not participate in any open effected electronically by the
Exchange and if previously entered, would be ignored. Finally, proposed
Rule 123D(a)(2) would provide that, unless otherwise specified,
references to an open or opening in proposed Rules 123D(a)(3)-(a)(6)
would also mean a reopening following a trading halt or pause.
    Proposed Rule 123D(a)(3) would specify when the Exchange would open
a security on a trade and would provide that the Exchange would open a
security on a trade if there is buy and sell interest that can trade a
round lot or more at a price that is no greater than or no less than a
specified range (``Opening Price Range'') away from the last sale price
on the Exchange (``Reference Price''). Proposed Rule 123D(a)(3) would
further provide that the Exchange would determine the Opening Price
Range parameters upon advance notice to market participants.
    Unlike DMMs, who have the obligation to trade for their own account
to supply liquidity as needed to facilitate openings,\5\ the Exchange
would not supply any liquidity when effecting an electronic open.
Without the addition of liquidity to offset an imbalance, pricing the
opening based on a significant imbalance could result in an opening
price that may not be reasonably related to the last sale price on the
Exchange. To avoid opening a security at a price too far away from the
last sale, the Exchange proposes to establish numerical guidelines to
provide parameters regarding the price a security may open when the
Exchange opens such security on a trade. The Exchange proposes to
establish the Opening Price Range parameters from time to time upon
advance notice to market participants, which is similar to how other
markets function.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Rule 104(a)(2) & 104(f)(ii).
    \6\ See, e.g., Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq'') Rule
4752(b)[sic](2)(E) (Nasdaq management sets and modifies benchmarks
and thresholds for the Nasdaq Opening Cross from time to time upon
prior notice to market participants); NYSE Arca Equities, Inc.
(``NYSE Arca Equities'') Rule 1.1(s)(A) (NYSE Arca Equities sets and
modifiers price collar thresholds for the Market Order Auction from
time to time upon prior notice to ETP Holders).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule 123D(a)(3)(A)-(C) would specify how orders would
participate if the Exchange opens a security on a trade. Proposed Rule
123D(a)(3)(A) would provide that if all interest guaranteed to
participate in an opening trade under Rule 115A(b) \7\ could trade at a
price consistent with the Opening Price Range, the opening trade would
be at the price at which all such interest could trade. Proposed Rule
123D(a)(3)(B) would provide that if there are only Market Orders on
both sides of the market, the opening price would be the Reference
Price.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Rule 115A(b) provides that when arranging an opening or
reopening price, except as provided for in Rule 115A(b)(2) which
concerns opening a security on a quote, market interest would be
guaranteed to participate in the opening or reopening transaction
and have precedence over limit interest that is priced equal to the
opening or reopening price of a security and DMM interest. For
purposes of the opening or reopening transaction, market interest
includes (1) market and Market on Open (``MOO'') orders, (2) tick-
sensitive market and MOO orders to buy (sell) that are priced higher
(lower) than the opening or reopening price, (3) limit interest to
buy (sell) that is priced higher (lower) than the opening or
reopening price, and (iv) Floor broker interest entered manually by
the DMM. See Rule 115A(b)(1)(A). For purposes of the opening or
reopening transaction, limit interest would include (2) limited-
priced interest, including-Quotes, Limit on Open (``LOO'') orders,
and G orders; and (ii) tick-sensitive market and MOO orders that are
priced equal to the opening or reopening price of a security. See
Rule 115A(b)(1)(C). In addition, G orders that are priced equal to
the opening or reopening price of a security would yield to all
other limit interest priced equal to the opening or reopening price
of a security except DMM interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because the Exchange would open a security within specified
guidelines, not all interest that is intended for the open may
participate in such an open. Proposed Rule 123D(a)(3)(C) would
therefore provide that if interest that is otherwise guaranteed to
participate in an opening trade under Rule 115A(b) would cause an
opening price to be outside the Opening Price Range, such interest
would not be guaranteed to participate in the opening trade. In that
case, the Exchange proposes that the opening trade would be at the
price at which the maximum volume of shares is tradable that is closest
to the Reference Price and that orders would be allocated in the
following priority, which is based on the priority of orders set forth
in Rule 115A(b):
     Proposed Rule 123D(a)(3)(C)(i) would provide that Market
and Market-on-Open (``MOO'') orders would trade first in time priority,
provided that, during a Short Sale Period, sell short market orders and
MOO orders would be adjusted to a Permitted Price \8\ and would be
considered limit orders for purposes of determining allocation
priority.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ As set forth in Rule 440B, a short sale price test is
activated if the price of a listed security declines by 10% or more
from the previous day's last sale on the listing market and
continues through the end of the following trading day (the ``Short
Sale Period''). Pursuant to Rule 440B(e), Exchange systems will re-
price short sale orders that are limited to the current national
best bid (``NBB'') or lower and short sale market orders by one
minimum price increment above the NBB (the ``Permitted Price''). The
Permitted Price for securities for which the NBB is $1 or more is
$.01 above the NBB; the Permitted Price for securities for which the
NBB is below $1 is $.0001 above the NBB.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Proposed Rule 123D(a)(3)(C)(ii) would provide that Stop
Orders that

would be elected based on the opening price would trade second in time
priority. As further proposed, during a Short Sale Period, sell short
Stop Orders that are priced to a Permitted Price that would be lower
than the opening price would trade after all other Stop Orders and
before all other interest priced equal to or lower than the opening
price.
     Proposed Rule 123D(a)(3)(C)(iii) would provide that Limit
Orders (including Reserve Orders) to buy (sell) and e-Quotes (including
Reserve e-Quotes) to buy (sell) priced higher (lower) than the opening
price would trade third on parity by agent under Rule 72(c).\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Rule 72(c) describes the allocation of executions on the
Exchange and Rule 72(c)(ii) provides that for purposes of share
allocation in an execution, each single Floor broker, the DMM and
orders collectively represented in Exchange systems shall constitute
individual participants. Rule 72(c)(iv) provides that executed
volume shall be allocated to each participant on parity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Proposed Rule 123D(a)(3)(C)(iv) would provide that G-
quotes \10\ to buy (sell) priced higher (lower) than the opening price
will trade fourth on parity by agent under Rule 72(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Section 11(a)(1) of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 78k(a)(1), generally
prohibits a member of a national securities exchange from effecting
transactions on that exchange for its own account, the account of an
associated person, or any account over which it or an associated
person exercises discretion. Subsection (G) of Section 11(a)(1)
provides an exemption allowing an exchange member to have its own
floor broker execute a proprietary transaction (``G order''). A G-
Quote is an electronic method for Floor brokers to represent G
orders. G orders on NYSE yield priority, parity and precedence based
on size to all other non-G orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Finally, proposed Rule 123D(a)(3)(C)(v) would provide that
all other limit interest that is priced equal to the opening price will
trade last and be allocated consistent with Rule 115A(b)(1).
    Proposed Rule 123D(a)(4) would describe when the Exchange would
open a security electronically on a quote. First, proposed Rule
123D(a)(4)(A) would provide that if interest of less than a round lot
pairs off at a price within the Opening Price Range, the Exchange would
open on a quote. In this circumstance, after opening on a quote,
interest of less than a round lot would trade at the price closest to
the Reference Price (or at the Reference Price if the only interest is
market orders), but would not be reported as an opening trade.
    Proposed Rule 123D(a)(4)(B) would provide that the Exchange would
open a security electronically on a quote if interest of any size pairs
off at a price below (above) the lower (upper) boundary of the Opening
Price Range, in which case, such paired-off interest would not trade.
    Proposed Rule 123D(a)(4)(C) would provide that the Exchange would
open a security electronically on a quote if there is no interest that
can be quoted on either or both sides of the market. The proposed Rule
would further specify that if an opening quote has a zero bid and/or a
zero offer, it would not constitute an ``Opening Price'' as defined in
Section I(I) of the Regulation NMS Plan to Address Extraordinary Market
Volatility (the ``Plan'').\11\ Accordingly, if the Exchange were to
open on a quote with a zero bid and/or a zero offer, it would not
calculate a midpoint of the quote for purposes of calculating Price
Bands as provided for in Section V(B)(1) of the Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67091, 77 FR 33498
(June 6, 2012) (File No. 4-631).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule 123D(a)(5) would specify which information would be
provided in advance of an opening or reopening. In order to provide
transparency regarding the opening process, the Exchange proposes that
during an opening effected by the Exchange, Order Imbalance Information
pursuant to Rule 15(c) would be published.\12\ However, because the
Exchange would not open a security at a price outside of specified
ranges, the Exchange would not issue pre-opening indications in a
security pursuant to either Rule 15(a) or 123D.\13\ The Exchange
further proposes that it would publish pre-opening indications pursuant
to Rule 123D(b) for a re-opening following a regulatory halt.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Order Imbalance Information reflects real-time order
imbalances that accumulate prior to the opening transaction on the
Exchange and the price at which interest eligible to participate in
the opening transaction may be executed in full. Order Imbalance
Information disseminated pursuant to Rule 15(c) includes all
interest eligible for execution in the opening transaction of the
security in Exchange systems, i.e., electronic interest, including
Floor broker electronic interest, entered into Exchange systems
prior to the opening. Order Imbalance Information is disseminated on
the Exchange's proprietary data feeds. See Rule 15(c)(1).
    \13\ See Proposed Rule 123D(a)(2) (F) [sic]. Rule 123D(1)
requires the dissemination of one or more indications in connection
with any delayed opening where a security has not opened or been
quoted by 10 a.m. In addition, Rule 123D(1) provides that
dissemination of one or more indication is mandatory for an opening
which will result in a ``significant'' price change from the
previous close. For securities priced under $10, such indications
are mandatory if the price change is one dollar of more; for
securities between $10 and $99.99, indications are required for
price movements of the lesser of 10% or three dollars; and for
securities over $100, indications are required for price movements
of five dollars or more.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule 123D(a)(6) would describe under which circumstances
the Exchange would cancel orders after opening on a trade or quote. A
proposed in new Rule 123D(a)(6)(A), all unexecuted Market Orders, MOO
Orders, and LOO Orders would be cancelled. This would be new behavior
following an Exchange-facilitated open because under a DMM-facilitated
open, all Market and MOO Orders are guaranteed to participate and
therefore there would not be any unexecuted Market Orders or MOO Orders
following an opening. Proposed Rule 123D(a)(6)(B) would provide that
after an opening on a trade, buy (sell) Limit Orders priced higher
(lower) than the opening price would be cancelled. Lastly, proposed
Rule 123D(a)(6)(C) would provide that if interest would have paired off
at a price below (above) the lower (upper) boundary of the Opening
Price Range, after opening on a quote, sell (buy) Limit Orders would be
cancelled. The Exchange proposes to cancel only the side of the orders
that would cause an opening price to be outside of the Opening Price
Range parameters; the other side would not be cancelled and would be
included in the opening quote.
    The Exchange also proposes to delete current Rule 123D(3) and
related Supplementary Material .24. Rule 123D(3) sets forth a non-
regulatory trading halt condition titled ``Investment Company Units or
Index-Linked Securities Trading Condition'' adopted to facilitate the
listing and trading of all index-linked securities and ETFs from the
Exchange to its affiliate NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'') by December
31, 2007.\14\ The condition permits the Exchange to halt ETFs or index-
linked securities after January 1, 2008 that remain listed on the
NYSE.\15\ All NYSE-listed index-linked securities and ETFs have
transferred to NYSE Arca and are no longer traded on the Exchange,
rendering Rule 123D(3) and Supplementary Material .24 moot.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57035 (December 21,
2007), 72 FR 74386 (December 31, 2007) (SR-NYSE-2007-117).
    \15\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because of the technology changes associated with the proposed rule
change, the Exchange proposes to announce the implementation date via
Trader Update.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\16\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\17\ in particular, because it
is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices,
promote just and equitable principles of trade, remove impediments to
and perfect the mechanism of a free and

open market and a national market system, and protect investors and the
public interest. The Exchange believes that permitting the Exchange to
electronically open trading would remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system by
ensuring an orderly open if the registered DMM cannot manually or
electronically facilitate the open of trading as required under Rule
104(a). Similarly, the proposal promotes just and equitable principles
of trade and removes impediments to and perfects the mechanism of a
free and open market by providing customers and the investing public
with the certainty of an open in circumstances where business
continuity disruptions or other emergencies would prevent the assigned
DMMs from opening a security. For the same reasons, the proposal is
also designed to protect investors as well as the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed amendment to Rule
123D(a)(3) to provide that openings effected by the Exchange would be
within a proposed numerical guideline would remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market because, similar to how
Nasdaq and NYSE Arca Equities function, it would enable the Exchange to
set parameters for an opening to assure that the potential prices that
a security may open would not be significantly away from the Reference
Price. Similarly, the Exchange believes that excluding interest
eligible for the open that would cause an execution to occur outside
the Opening Price Range parameters, even if such interest would
otherwise be required to be included in an open effected by a DMM,
would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a fair and
orderly market because it would assure that the Exchange could effect
the open within the proposed specified price ranges. The proposed rule
therefore promotes just and equitable principles of trade because it
provides transparency to entering firms of whether interest would be
eligible to participate in a closing transaction effected by the
Exchange.
    Finally, deleting an obsolete halt condition in 123D(3) and related
Supplementary Material .24 removes impediments to and perfects the
mechanism of a free and open market by removing confusion that may
result from having obsolete references in the Exchange's rulebook. The
Exchange further believes that the proposal removes impediments to and
perfects the mechanism of a free and open market by ensuring that
persons subject to the Exchange's jurisdiction, regulators, and the
investing public, can more easily navigate and understand the
Exchange's rulebook. The Exchange believes that eliminating obsolete
references would not be inconsistent with the public interest and the
protection of investors because investors will not be harmed and in
fact would benefit from increased transparency, thereby reducing
potential confusion. Removing such obsolete references will also
further the goal of transparency and add clarity to the Exchange's
rules.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed rule change is
not intended to address competitive issues but rather enable the
Exchange to open trading where circumstances would prevent a DMM from
facilitating an open.

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

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

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

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \18\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\19\
Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) significantly affect the
protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative prior to
30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \19\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \20\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b4(f)(6)(iii),\21\ the Commission
may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \21\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \22\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-NYSE-2015-49 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Brent J. Fields,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2015-49. 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 offices of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted
without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to
File Number SR-NYSE-2015-49, and should be submitted on or before
November 24, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\23\
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-27911 Filed 11-2-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 208 (Friday, October 28, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65222-65224]
[FR Doc No: 2022-23548]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2022-0002]

Changes in Flood Hazard Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland
Security.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: New or modified Base (1-percent annual chance) Flood
Elevations (BFEs), base flood depths, Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA)
boundaries or zone designations, and/or regulatory floodways
(hereinafter referred to as flood hazard determinations) as shown on
the indicated Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) for each of the communities
listed in the table below are finalized. Each LOMR revises the Flood
Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and in some cases the Flood Insurance
Study (FIS) reports, currently in effect for the listed communities.

DATES: Each LOMR was finalized as in the table below.

ADDRESSES: Each LOMR is available for inspection at both the respective
Community Map Repository address listed in the table below and online
through the FEMA Map Service Center at https://msc.fema.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering
Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA,
400 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email)
[email protected]; or visit the FEMA Mapping and Insurance
eXchange (FMIX) online at https://www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) makes the final flood hazard determinations as shown in the
LOMRs for each community listed in the table below. Notice of these
modified flood hazard determinations has been published in newspapers
of local circulation and 90 days have elapsed since that publication.
The Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation has
resolved any appeals resulting from this notification.
    The modified flood hazard determinations are made pursuant to
section 206 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C.
4105, and are in accordance with the National Flood Insurance Act of
1968, 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq., and with 44 CFR part 65. The currently
effective community number is shown and must be used for all new
policies and renewals.
    The new or modified flood hazard information is the basis for the
floodplain management measures that the community is required either to
adopt or to show evidence of being already in effect in order to remain
qualified for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program
(NFIP).
    This new or modified flood hazard information, together with the
floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum
that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the
community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent
in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any
time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies
established by other Federal, State, or regional entities.
    This new or modified flood hazard determinations are used to meet
the floodplain management requirements of the NFIP. The changes in
flood hazard determinations are in accordance with 44 CFR 65.4.
    Interested lessees and owners of real property are encouraged to
review the final flood hazard information available at the address
cited below for each community or online through the FEMA Map Service
Center at https://msc.fema.gov.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, ``Flood
Insurance.'')

Nicholas A. Shufro,
Assistant Administrator for Risk Management (Acting), Federal Emergency
Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Chief executive         Community map                                         Community
          State and county           Location and case  No.   officer of community        repository             Date of  modification           No.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Colorado: Denver (FEMA Docket No.:   City and County of      The Honorable Michael  Department of          Oct. 14, 2022...................       080046
 B-2251).                             Denver (22-08-0130P).   B. Hancock, Mayor,     Transportation and
                                                              City and County of     Infrastructure, 201
                                                              Denver, 1437 Bannock   West Colfax Avenue,
                                                              Street, Room 350,      Department 608,
                                                              Denver, CO 80202.      Denver, CO 80202.
Delaware: Sussex (FEMA Docket No.:   Unincorporated areas    The Honorable Michael  Sussex County          Oct. 13, 2022...................       100029
 B-2259).                             of Sussex County (22-   H. Vincent,            Planning and Zoning
                                      03-0052P).              President, Sussex      Department, 2 The
                                                              County Council, P.O.   Circle, Georgetown,
                                                              Box 589, Georgetown,   DE 19947.
                                                              DE 19947.
Florida:
    Broward (FEMA Docket No.: B-     City of Oakland Park    The Honorable Michael  City Hall, 3650        Oct. 11, 2022...................       120050
     2253).                           (22-04-0596P).          E. Carn, Mayor, City   Northeast 12th
                                                              of Oakland Park,       Avenue, Oakland
                                                              3650 Northeast 12th    Park, FL 33334.
                                                              Avenue, Oakland
                                                              Park, FL 33334.
    Collier (FEMA Docket No.: B-     City of Marco Island    Mike McNees, Manager,  Building Services      Oct. 11, 2022...................       120426
     2251).                           (22-04-2823P).          City of Marco          Department, 50 Bald
                                                              Island, 50 Bald        Eagle Drive, Marco
                                                              Eagle Drive, Marco     Island, FL 34145.
                                                              Island, FL 34145.
    Duval (FEMA Docket No.: B-2251)  City of Jacksonville    The Honorable          Planning and           Sep. 28, 2022...................       120078
                                      Beach (22-04-0750P).    Christine Hoffman,     Development
                                                              Mayor, City of         Department, 11 North
                                                              Jacksonville Beach,    3rd Street,
                                                              11 North 3rd Street,   Jacksonville Beach,
                                                              Jacksonville Beach,    FL 32250.
                                                              FL 32250.
    Lee (FEMA Docket No.: B-2251)..  City of Bonita Springs  The Honorable Rick     Community Development  Sep. 23, 2022...................       120680
                                      (22-04-0173P).          Steinmeyer, Mayor,     Department, 9220
                                                              City of Bonita         Bonita Beach Road,
                                                              Springs, 9101 Bonita   Bonita Springs, FL
                                                              Beach Road, Bonita     34135.
                                                              Springs, FL 34135.
    Manatee (FEMA Docket No.: B-     Unincorporated areas    The Honorable Kevin    Manatee County         Oct. 14, 2022...................       120153
     2251).                           of Manatee County (21-  Van Ostenbridge,       Building and
                                      04-2233P).              Chair, Manatee         Development Services
                                                              County Board of        Department, 1112
                                                              Commissioners, 1112    Manatee Avenue West,
                                                              Manatee Avenue West,   Bradenton, FL 34205.
                                                              Bradenton, FL 34205.
    Monroe (FEMA Docket No.: B-      Unincorporated areas    The Honorable David    Monroe County          Sep. 22, 2022...................       125129
     2251).                           of Monroe County (22-   Rice, Mayor, Monroe    Building Department,
                                      04-0860P).              County Board of        2798 Overseas
                                                              Commissioners, 1100    Highway, Suite 300,
                                                              Simonton Street, Key   Marathon, FL 33050.
                                                              West, FL 33040.

    Monroe (FEMA Docket No.: B-      Unincorporated areas    The Honorable David    Monroe County          Oct. 3, 2022....................       125129
     2251).                           of Monroe County (22-   Rice, Mayor, Monroe    Building Department,
                                      04-2418P).              County Board of        2798 Overseas
                                                              Commissioners, 1100    Highway, Suite 300,
                                                              Simonton Street, Key   Marathon, FL 33050.
                                                              West, FL 33040.
    Osceola (FEMA Docket No.: B-     City of St. Cloud (20-  Bill Sturgeon,         Building Department,   Oct. 3, 2022....................       120191
     2251).                           04-5566P).              Manager, City of St.   1300 9th Street, St.
                                                              Cloud, 1300 9th        Cloud, FL 34769.
                                                              Street, St. Cloud,
                                                              FL 34769.
    Polk (FEMA Docket No.: B-2251).  Unincorporated areas    Bill Beasley,          Polk County Land       Oct. 13, 2022...................       120261
                                      of Polk County (22-04-  Manager, Polk          Development
                                      0291X).                 County, 330 West       Division, 330 West
                                                              Church Street,         Church Street,
                                                              Bartow, FL 33831.      Bartow, FL 33831.
    Sarasota (FEMA Docket No.: B-    City of Sarasota (22-   The Honorable Erik     Development Services   Oct. 11, 2022...................       125150
     2253).                           04-2558P).              Arroyo, Mayor, City    Department, 1565 1st
                                                              of Sarasota, 1565      Street, Sarasota, FL
                                                              1st Street, Room       34236.
                                                              101, Sarasota, FL
                                                              34236.
    Seminole (FEMA Docket No.: B-    City of Lake Mary (22-  Kevin Smith, Manager,  Municipal Services     Oct. 3, 2022....................       120416
     2251).                           04-0236P).              City of Lake Mary,     Complex, 911 Wallace
                                                              100 North Country      Court, Lake Mary, FL
                                                              Club Road, Lake        32746.
                                                              Mary, FL 32795.
Kentucky: Jefferson (FEMA Docket     Louisville-Jefferson    The Honorable Greg     Louisville-Jefferson   Sep. 26, 2022...................       210120
 No.: B-2251).                        County Metro            Fischer, Mayor,        County Metropolitan
                                      Government (21-04-      Louisville-Jefferson   Sewer District, 700
                                      5654P).                 County, Metro          West Liberty Street,
                                                              Government, 527 West   Louisville, KY 40203.
                                                              Jefferson Street,
                                                              Louisville, KY 40202.
Louisiana: Lafayette (FEMA Docket    City of Youngsville     The Honorable Ken      City Hall, 305 Iberia  Oct. 14, 2022...................       220358
 No.: B-2268).                        (21-06-3256P).          Ritter, Mayor, City    Street, Youngsville,
                                                              of Youngsville, 305    LA 70592.
                                                              Iberia Street,
                                                              Youngsville, LA
                                                              70592.
Maryland: Prince George's (FEMA      Unincorporated areas    The Honorable Angela   Prince George's        Sep. 23, 2022...................       245208
 Docket No.: B-2251).                 of Prince George's      D. Alsobrooks,         County Department of
                                      County (21-03-1450P).   Executive, Prince      Permitting
                                                              George's County,       Inspections and
                                                              1301 McCormick         Enforcement, 9400
                                                              Drive, Suite 4000,     Peppercorn Place,
                                                              Largo, MD 20774.       Suite 230, Largo, MD
                                                                                20774.
New Hampshire: Carroll (FEMA Docket  Town of Jackson (22-01- The Honorable Barbara  Building Department,   Oct. 11, 2022...................       330014
 No.: B-2259).                        0604P).                 Campbell, Chair,       54 Main Street,
                                                              Town of Jackson        Jackson, NH 03846.
                                                              Board of Selectmen,
                                                              54 Main Street,
                                                              Jackson, NH 03846.
North Carolina: Durham (FEMA Docket  Unincorporated areas    The Honorable Brenda   Durham County          Sept. 21, 2022..................       370085
 No.: B-2251).                        of Durham County (21-   Howerton, Chair,       Planning Department,
                                      04-5308P).              Durham County Board    101 City Hall Plaza,
                                                              of Commissioners,      Durham, NC 27701.
                                                              200 East Main
                                                              Street, Durham, NC
                                                              27701.
Oklahoma: Canadian and Oklahoma      City of Oklahoma City   The Honorable David    Public Works           Oct. 14, 2022...................       405378
 (FEMA Docket No.: B-2253).           (21-06-3298P).          Holt, Mayor, City of   Department, 420 West
                                                              Oklahoma City, 200     Main Street, Suite
                                                              North Walker Avenue,   700, Oklahoma City,
                                                              3rd Floor, Oklahoma    OK 73102.
                                                              City, OK 73102.
Pennsylvania:
    Philadelphia (FEMA Docket No.:   City of Philadelphia    The Honorable Jim      Department of          Sep. 26, 2022...................       420757
     B-2253).                         (21-03-1283P).          Kenney, Mayor, City    Licenses and
                                                              of Philadelphia,       Inspections, 1401
                                                              1400 John F. Kennedy   John F. Kennedy
                                                              Boulevard, Room 215,   Boulevard, 11th
                                                              Philadelphia, PA       Floor, Philadelphia,
                                                              19107.                 PA 19102.
    Philadelphia (FEMA Docket No.:   Township of Lower       Ernie B. McNeely,      Township Hall, 75      Sep. 26, 2022...................       420701
     B-2253).                         Merion (21-03-1283P).   Manager, Township of   East Lancaster
                                                              Lower Merion, 75       Avenue, Ardmore, PA
                                                              East Lancaster         19003.
                                                              Avenue, Ardmore, PA
                                                              19003.
South Carolina:
    Sumter (FEMA Docket No.: B-      City of Sumter (22-04-  The Honorable David    Sumter City-County     Sep. 30, 2022...................       450184
     2253).                           2326P).                 P. Merchant, Mayor,    Planning Department,
                                                              City of Sumter, 21     12 West Liberty
                                                              North Main Street,     Street, Sumter, SC
                                                              Sumter, SC 29151.      29150.
    Sumter (FEMA Docket No.: B-      Unincorporated areas    The Honorable James    Sumter City-County     Sep. 30, 2022...................       450182
     2253).                           of Sumter County (22-   T. McCain, Jr.,        Planning Department,
                                      04-2326P).              Chair, Sumter County   12 West Liberty
                                                              Council, 13 East       Street, Sumter, SC
                                                              Canal Street,          29150.
                                                              Sumter, SC 29150.
Texas:
    Bexar (FEMA Docket No.: B-2253)  Unincorporated areas    The Honorable Nelson   Bexar County Public    Oct. 3, 2022....................       480035
                                      of Bexar County (21-    W. Wolff, Bexar        Works Department,
                                      06-2900P).              County Judge, 101      1948 Probandt
                                                              West Nueva Street,     Street, San Antonio,
                                                              10 Floor, San          TX 78214.
                                                              Antonio, TX 78205.
    Collin (FEMA Docket No.: B-      City of Anna (21-06-    The Honorable Nate     Public Works           Sep. 26, 2022...................       480132
     2253).                           3396P).                 Pike, Mayor, City of   Department, 3223
                                                              Anna, P.O. Box 776,    North Powell
                                                              Anna, TX 75409.        Parkway, Anna, TX
                                                                                75409.
    Collin (FEMA Docket No.: B-      Unincorporated areas    The Honorable Chris    Collin County          Sep. 26, 2022...................       480130
     2253).                           of Collin County (21-   Hill, Collin County    Engineering
                                      06-3396P).              Judge, 2300            Department, 4690
                                                              Bloomdale Road,        Community Avenue,
                                                              Suite 4192,            Suite 200, McKinney,
                                                              McKinney, TX 75071.    TX 75071.
    Denton (FEMA Docket No.: B-      City of Fort Worth (22- The Honorable Mattie   Transportation and     Oct. 11, 2022...................       480596
     2251).                           06-0847P).              Parker, Mayor, City    Public Works
                                                              of Fort Worth, 200     Department,
                                                              Texas Street, Fort     Engineering Vault,
                                                              Worth, TX 76102.       200 Texas Street,
                                                                                Fort Worth, TX 76102.

    Hays (FEMA Docket No.: B-2253).  City of Buda (21-06-    The Honorable Lee      Engineering            Oct. 13, 2022...................       481640
                                      2861P).                 Urbanovsky, Mayor,     Department, 405 East
                                                              City of Buda, 405      Loop Street,
                                                              East Loop Street,      Building 100, Buda,
                                                              Building 100, Buda,    TX 78610.
                                                              TX 78610.
    Hays (FEMA Docket No.: B-2253).  Unincorporated areas    The Honorable Ruben    Hays County Office of  Oct. 13, 2022...................       480321
                                      of Hays County (21-06-  Becerra, Hays County   Development
                                      2861P).                 Judge, 111 East San    Services, 2171
                                                              Antonio Street,        Yarrington Road,
                                                              Suite 300, San         Suite 100, Kyle, TX
                                                              Marcos, TX 78666.      78640.
    Johnson (FEMA Docket No.: B-     City of Burleson (21-   The Honorable Chris    City Hall, 141 West    Oct. 6, 2022....................       485459
     2251).                           06-3092P).              Fletcher, Mayor,       Renfro Street,
                                                              City of Burleson,      Burleson, TX 76028.
                                                              141 West Renfro
                                                              Street, Burleson, TX
                                                              76028.
    Tarrant (FEMA Docket No.: B-     City of Fort Worth (21- The Honorable Mattie   Transportation and     Sep. 29, 2022...................       480596
     2251).                           06-2361P).              Parker, Mayor, City    Public Works
                                                              of Fort Worth, 200     Department,
                                                              Texas Street, Fort     Engineering Vault,
                                                              Worth, TX 76102.       200 Texas Street,
                                                                                Fort Worth, TX 76102.
    Tarrant (FEMA Docket No.: B-     Unincorporated areas    The Honorable B. Glen  Tarrant County         Sep. 29, 2022...................       480582
     2251).                           of Tarrant County (21-  Whitley, Tarrant       Administration
                                      06-2361P).              County Judge, 100      Building, 100 East
                                                              East Weatherford       Weatherford Street,
                                                              Street, Room 502A,     Fort Worth, TX 76196.
                                                              Fort Worth, TX 76196.
    Tarrant (FEMA Docket No.: B-     City of Mansfield (22-  The Honorable Michael  Department of Zoning   Oct. 11, 2022...................       480606
     2253).                           06-0409P).              A. Evans, Mayor,       and Planning, 1200
                                                              City of Mansfield,     East Broad Street,
                                                              1200 East Broad        Mansfield, TX 76063.
                                                              Street, Mansfield,
                                                              TX 76063.
    Williamson (FEMA Docket No.: B-  City of Leander (21-06- Mr. Richard B.         Engineering            Oct. 14, 2022...................       481536
     2251).                           2660P).                 Beverlin, III,         Department, 201
                                                              Manager, City of       North Brushy Street,
                                                              Leander, 105 North     Leander, TX 78641.
                                                              Brushy Street,
                                                              Leander, TX 78641.
Utah: Weber (FEMA Docket No.: B-     Unincorporated areas    The Honorable Scott    Weber County Center,   Oct. 3, 2022....................       490187
 2253).                               of Weber County (21-    Jenkins, Chair,        2380 Washington
                                      08-1088P).              Weber County           Boulevard, Suite
                                                              Commission, 2380       360, Ogden, UT 84401.
                                                              Washington
                                                              Boulevard, Suite
                                                              360, Ogden, UT 84401.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2022-23548 Filed 10-27-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-12-P