 [Federal Register Volume 82, Number 159 (Friday, August 18, 2017)] [Proposed Rules] [Pages 39399-39402] [FR Doc No: 2017-17339]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 158

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0683; FRL-9965-54]

RIN 2070-AK41

Pesticides; Technical Amendment to Data Requirements for

Antimicrobial Pesticides

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing a correction pertaining to the ``200 ppb

(parts per billion) level'' described in the antimicrobial pesticides

data requirements regulation to clarify that the 200 ppb level is based

on total estimated daily dietary intake for an individual and not on

the amount of residue present on a single food, as is incorrectly

implied by the current regulatory text. This change is intended to

enhance understanding of the data required to support an antimicrobial

pesticide registration and does not alter the burden or costs

associated with these previously-promulgated requirements. Through this

action, EPA is not proposing any new data requirements or any other

revisions (substantive or otherwise) to existing requirements.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 17, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification

(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0683, 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 Confidential Business

Information (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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cameo Smoot, Field and External

Affairs Division (7506P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental

Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460;

(703) 305-5454; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

I. Executive Summary

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are a

producer or registrant of an antimicrobial pesticide product or device.

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, but are not limited to:

     NAICS code 325320, Pesticide and Other Agricultural

Chemical Manufacturing, e.g., pesticide manufacturers or formulators of

pesticide products, importers, exporters, or any person or company who

seeks to register a pesticide product or to obtain a tolerance for a

pesticide product.

    If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this

action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. What is the Agency's authority for taking this action?

    This action is issued under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and

Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq. and the Federal Food,

Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d).

C. What action is the Agency taking?

    EPA is proposing a single correction to the data requirements for

antimicrobial pesticide products that are codified in 40 CFR part 158,

subpart W. EPA is not proposing any other changes (substantive or

otherwise) or any new data requirements. The correction to the ``200

ppb level'' described in 40 CFR 158.2230(d) will clarify that the 200

ppb level is based on total estimated daily dietary intake for an

individual and not on the amount of residue present on a single food,

as is incorrectly implied by the current regulatory text.

D. What are the incremental costs and benefits of this action?

    No new data requirements are proposed and this correction does not

result in any new burden or costs being imposed. The proposed change

represents a technical correction; therefore, registrants will not

submit more studies than they are currently submitting in their

application packages. As a result, this change will not cause any

increase in the cost to register an antimicrobial pesticide product.

    EPA believes the correction should provide registrants with more

specific information such that it could reduce the number of

consultations (emails, phone calls, and meetings) registrants seek to

ensure that they are correctly interpreting the regulations before they

begin their testing programs. Applicants may save time and money by

better understanding when studies are needed and by not submitting

unneeded studies. Submission of all required studies at the time of

application may reduce potential delays in the registration process,

thereby allowing products to enter the market earlier. The clarity

derived from having more understandable data requirements may be

especially important to small firms and new firms entering the industry

who may have less experience with the pesticide registration program

than those firms that routinely work with the Agency.

    Although we believe that the correction reduces uncertainty and

will result in a decrease in the number of inquiries registrants may

make to EPA seeking clarification on this particular point, EPA did not

attempt to determine whether or not, or the extent to which, the

correction might result in any cost savings for the registrants or for

EPA. Because EPA is not proposing any new data requirements and also

made sure not to increase the frequency at which the existing data are

required, EPA determined there is no need to perform an economic

analysis for this proposed rulemaking.

E. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through

regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the

information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or

CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as

CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the

specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one

complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as

CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information

claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.

Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with

procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.

    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When preparing and submitting

your comments, see the commenting tips at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html.

II. Background

    Under FIFRA, every pesticide product must be registered (or

specifically exempted from registration under FIFRA section 25(b)) by

EPA before the pesticide may be sold or distributed in the United

States. To obtain a registration, an applicant or registrant must

demonstrate to the Agency's satisfaction that, among other things, the

pesticide product, when used in accordance with widespread and commonly

recognized practice, will not cause ``unreasonable adverse effects'' to

humans or the environment.

    Under FIFRA, anyone seeking to register a pesticide product is

required to provide information to EPA that demonstrates, among other

things, that the product can be used without posing unreasonable

adverse effects on the environment. The FFDCA section 408 dietary

safety factor is incorporated into FIFRA's definition of ``unreasonable

adverse effects on the environment.'' Moreover, EPA has authority under

FFDCA to establish a tolerance or an exemption from the need for a

tolerance for a pesticide chemical residue in or on food, provided

there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate

exposures to the residues of the pesticide product, including all

anticipated dietary exposures and all other exposures for which there

is reliable information. EPA's data requirement regulations in 40 CFR

part 158 outline the kinds of data and related information typically

needed to register a pesticide product. The data requirements are

organized by major pesticide type (e.g., conventional, biochemical,

microbial, or antimicrobial), scientific discipline (e.g., toxicology

or residue chemistry) and major use sites (e.g., outdoor vs. indoor,

terrestrial, aquatic, or greenhouse).

    The data requirements in 40 CFR part 158 were first promulgated in

1984 (49 FR 42856, October 24, 1984), and principally focused on the

data needed to register agricultural pesticide chemicals. In the

Federal Register of October 26, 2007, EPA promulgated a final rule to

revise and update the data requirements for conventional pesticides (72

FR 60934) (FRL-8106-5). Also on October 26, 2007, EPA promulgated a

rule to specifically describe the data requirements for biochemical and

microbial pesticides (72 FR 60988) (FRL-8109-8). In the Federal

Register of May 8, 2013, the data requirements specific to

antimicrobial pesticides were promulgated (78 FR 26936) (FRL-8886-5)

and became effective on July 8, 2013.

III. Legal Challenge to the 2013 Rule, Resulting Settlement Agreement,

and This Proposal

    On July 3, 2013, the American Chemistry Council (ACC) filed a

petition for judicial review of the 2013 final rule, entitled ``Data

Requirements for Antimicrobial Pesticides'' (78 FR 26936, May 8, 2013),

in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia

Circuit. (American Chemistry Council, Inc. v. Environmental Protection

Agency, No.13-1207 (D.C. Cir.)). On July 8, 2013, the final rule became

effective.

    EPA and ACC subsequently entered into a settlement agreement that

addressed ACC's petition for judicial review of the 40 CFR part 158,

subpart W data requirements rule. The settlement agreement, which

became effective on March 2, 2015, is available at http://www.regulations.gov using the docket identifier EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0110-

0139. Under the settlement agreement with ACC, EPA agreed to propose by

September 2, 2017, a correction to the current language at 40 CFR

158.2230(d) referring to the 200 ppb level as ``the concentration of

the antimicrobial residues in or on the food item'' in order to make

the language consistent with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's

(FDA) policy set forth in ``Guidance for Industry, Preparation of Food

Contact Notifications for Food Contact Substances: Toxicology

Recommendations. Final Guidance. April 2002.'' A copy of the FDA

guidance has been placed in the docket for this proposed rulemaking.

Accordingly, the proposal clarifies that the 200 ppb level established

in the rule is based on total estimated daily dietary intake, and not

on the amount of residue present on a single food item or commodity. As

part of its obligations under the settlement agreement, EPA previously

addressed this issue in interim guidance issued on April 30, 2015. This

guidance is available on EPA's Web site at https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-registration/epa-data-requirements-registration-antimicrobial-pesticides-part-158w.

IV. Request for Comments

    The Agency invites the public to provide its views and suggestions

for the proposed change in this document, and will formally respond to

any comments on this proposed change at the time of issuing a final

rule. EPA is particularly interested in comments and any suggestions

for better characterizing the benefits of burden reduction or savings

resulting from this correction.

V. FIFRA Review Requirements

    In accordance with FIFRA sections 21 and 25(a), EPA submitted a

draft of this proposed rule to the Secretary of the U.S. Department of

Agriculture (USDA), and the Secretary of the Department of Health and

Human Services (HHS), with copies to the appropriate Congressional

Committees (i.e., the Committee on Agriculture in the U.S. House of

Representatives, and the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and

Forestry in the United States Senate). On June 1, 2017, USDA completed

their review of the draft proposed rule and informed EPA that they did

not have any comments. On July 17, 2017, HHS completed their review of

the draft proposed rule and provided two comments. First, with regard

to the section II. Background summary paragraph about FIFRA and FFDCA

authority, HHS submitted suggested text to avoid the suggestion that

the FFDCA contains provisions related to the registration of a

pesticide product, and also inserted language concerning ``aggregate''

exposures. EPA has addressed the comments submitted by HHS in the

proposed rule and has provided additional clarifying language. The

proposed rule now states that ``Under FIFRA, anyone seeking to register

a pesticide product is required to provide information to EPA that

demonstrates, among other things, that the product can be used without

posing unreasonable adverse effects on the environment. The FFDCA

section 408 dietary safety factor is incorporated into FIFRA's

definition of ``unreasonable adverse effects on the environment.''

Moreover, EPA has authority under FFDCA to establish a tolerance or an

exemption from the need for a tolerance for a pesticide chemical

residue in or on food, provided there is a reasonable certainty that no

harm will result from aggregate exposures to the residues of the

pesticide product, including all anticipated dietary exposures and all

other exposures for which there is reliable information.'' In the

second HHS comment, HHS suggested that we specifically identify the FDA

policy cited in the draft proposed rule. In

response, EPA has specifically identified the FDA policy and placed a

copy of the FDA's ``Guidance for Industry, Preparation of Food Contact

Notifications for Food Contact Substances: Toxicology Recommendations.

Final Guidance. April 2002,'' in the docket for this action.

    Under FIFRA section 25(d), EPA also submitted a draft of this

proposed rule to the FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel (SAP). The SAP

waived its review of the proposed rule on June 2, 2017, because the

proposed rule does not contain scientific issues that warrant review by

the Panel.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders

can be found at http://www2.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review; Executive

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review; and Executive

Order 13777: Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs

    This action is not a significant regulatory action and was

therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)

for review under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993)

and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011). In addition, since this

action does not contain a new requirement or impose any new burden or

costs, the burden reduction and controlling provisions in Executive

Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 3, 2017), do not apply. Although we

believe that the correction reduces uncertainty and will result in a

decrease in the number of inquiries registrants may make to EPA seeking

clarification on this particular point, EPA did not attempt to

determine whether or not, or the extent to which, the correction might

result in any cost savings for the registrants or for EPA.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose any new information collection

requirements that would require additional review or approval by OMB

under the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. The information collection

requirements associated with the submission of data under 40 CFR part

158 have already been approved by OMB pursuant to the PRA and are

covered by the following existing Information Collection Requests

(ICRs):

     The information collection activities associated with the

establishment of a tolerance are currently approved under OMB Control

No. 2070-0024 (EPA ICR No. 0597).

     The information collection activities associated with the

application for a new or amended registration of a pesticide are

currently approved under OMB Control No. 2070-0060 (EPA ICR No. 0277).

     The information collection activities associated with the

generation of data for registration review are currently approved under

OMB Control No. 2070-0174 (EPA ICR No. 2288).

     The information collection activities associated with the

generation of data for experimental use permits are currently approved

under OMB Control No. 2070-0040 (EPA ICR No. 0276).

    This proposed rule does not involve a change in information

collection activities associated with the generation of data for

antimicrobial pesticide products or devices. EPA believes no additional

burden for data submission would be imposed by the simple correction in

this proposed rule. The most that may be needed is for an applicant to

become familiar with the change. Although we believe that the

correction reduces uncertainty and will result in a decrease in the

number of inquiries registrants may make to EPA seeking clarification

on this particular point, EPA did not attempt to determine whether or

not, or the extent to which, the correction might result in any cost

savings for the registrants or for EPA. EPA is seeking comment on this

point in particular.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic

impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA, 5

U.S.C. 601 et seq. The small entities directly regulated by this

proposed rule are small manufacturers of antimicrobial pesticide

products.

    After considering the economic impacts of this proposed rule on

small entities, EPA certifies that this action will not have a

significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

In determining whether a rule has a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities, the impact of concern is any

significant adverse economic impact on small entities, since the

primary purpose of the regulatory flexibility analyses is to identify

and address regulatory alternatives ``which minimize any significant

economic impact of the rule on small entities.'' 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.

Thus, an agency may certify that a rule will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial number of small entities if the rule

relieves regulatory burden, or otherwise has a positive economic effect

on all of the small entities subject to the rule.

    There will not be significant adverse economic impacts on a

substantial number of small entities by the simple correction proposed.

On the contrary, all registrants of pesticide products, regardless of

size, will benefit equally by receiving the clearer editorial and/or

technical direction, likely reduce the number of requests for further

clarification of data requirements, and likely enjoy a more streamlined

registration process.

    We continue to be interested in the potential impacts of the

correction in this proposed rule on small entities and welcome comments

on issues related to such impacts.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain an unfunded federal mandate of $100

million or more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not

significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Accordingly, this

action is not subject to the requirements of UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1501 et

seq.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications as specified in

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). It will not have

substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between

the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power

and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Thus,

Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this action.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian

Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications as specified in

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action will

not have any effect on tribal governments, on the relationship between

the Federal Government and the Indian tribes, or on the distribution of

power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian

tribes. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

    EPA specifically solicits additional comment on this proposed

action from tribal officials.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental

Health Risks and Safety Risks

    EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997)

as applying only to those regulatory

actions that concern environmental health or safety risks that the EPA

has reason to believe may disproportionately affect children, per the

definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in section 2-202 of the

Executive Order. This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045

because it does not concern an environmental health risk or safety

risk.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355,

May 22, 2001), because it is not a significant regulatory action under

Executive Order 12866, nor does it affect energy supply, distribution

or use.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This action does not involve any technical standards that would

require the consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant to

NTTAA section 12(d), 15 U.S.C. 272 note.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental

Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    This action does not involve special consideration of environmental

justice related issues as specified in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR

7629, February 16, 1994), because this action does not address human

health or environmental risks or otherwise have any disproportionate

high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority,

low-income or indigenous populations.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 158

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,

Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: August 4, 2017.

Louise P. Wise,

Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution

Prevention.

    Therefore, the EPA proposes to amend 40 CFR part 158 as follows:

PART 158--[AMENDED]

0

1. The authority citation for part 158 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  7 U.S.C. 136-136y; subpart U is also issued under 31

U.S.C. 9701.

0

2. In Sec.  158.2230, revise paragraph (d) to read as follows:

Sec.  158.2230  Antimicrobial toxicology.

* * * * *

    (d) 200 parts per billion (ppb). The 200 ppb level was originally

used by the Food and Drug Administration with respect to the

concentration of residues in or on food for tiering of data

requirements for indirect food use biocides. The Agency has also

adopted this same residue level for determining toxicology data

requirements for indirect food uses of antimicrobial pesticides. The

200 ppb level is the concentration of antimicrobial residues in the

total estimated daily dietary intake.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 2017-17339 Filed 8-17-17; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 157 (Tuesday, August 16, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 50250-50252]
[FR Doc No: 2022-17586]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 100

[Docket Number USCG-2022-0614]
RIN 1625-AA08

Special Local Regulation; Ohio River, Cincinnati, OH

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing to establish a temporary special
local regulation for all navigable waters of the Ohio River, extending
the entire width of the river, between mile marker (MM) 464.0-473.0 and
the Licking River between MM 0.0-0.3. In the event the Ohio River Gauge
is at or above the 45 foot level, the special local regulation will
extend west to MM 476.0. This action is necessary to provide for the
safety of life on these navigable waters near Cincinnati, OH during
Riverfest 2022 on September 4, 2022 through September 5, 2022. This
rulemaking prohibits persons and vessels from operating above no wake
speeds in the area unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Sector
Ohio Valley or a designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 12 p.m. on September 4, 2022 through
3 a.m. on September 5, 2022.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2022-0614 in the search box and click ``Search.'' Next, in the Document
Type column, select ``Supporting & Related Material.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Petty Officer Thomas Harp, Marine Safety Detachment
Cincinnati, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

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

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice
and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because it is impracticable. We must
establish this regulation by September 4, 2022 and lack sufficient time
to provide a reasonable comment period and then consider those comments
before issuing this rule.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of
this rule would be impractable and contrary to the public interest
because immediate action is necessary to protect persons and property
from the dangers associated with the event.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C.
70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231). The Captain of the Port Ohio Valley
(COTP) has determined that potential hazards with the firework display,
occurring at 12 p.m. on September 4 until 3 a.m. on September 5, 2022,
will be a safety concern for all navigable waters on the Ohio River
between MM 464-473 and the Licking River between MM 0.0-0.3. In the
event the Ohio River Gauge is at or above the 45 foot level, this
regulation will extend west to MM 476.0 on the Ohio River before,
during, and after the scheduled event.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a special local regulation from 12 p.m. on
September 4 until 3 a.m. September 5, 2022. The special local
regulation would cover all waters of the Ohio River between MM 464-479
and the Licking River between MM 0.0-0.3. In the event the Ohio River
Gauge is at or above the 45 foot level, this regulation will extend
west to MM 476.0 on the Ohio River in Cincinnati, OH. The duration of
the special local regulation is to ensure the safety of vessels and
these navigable waters before, during, and after the scheduled event.
No vessel or person is permitted to operate above no wake speeds
without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated
representative. A designated representative is a commissioned, warrant,
or petty officer of the U.S. Coast Guard assigned to units under the
operational control of Sector Ohio Valley. They may be contacted on
VHF-FM Channel 16 or by telephone at 1-800-253-7465. Persons and
vessels permitted to enter this regulated area must transit at their
slowest safe speed and comply with all lawful directions issued by the
COTP or the designated representative.

V. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. This rule has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, this
rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB).
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
location, duration, time-of-day of the special local regulation. The
special local regulation will be in place from 12 p.m. on September 4,
2022 to 3 a.m. on September 5, 2022 on the Ohio River between MM 464-
479 and the Licking River between MM 0.0-0.3. In the event the Ohio
River Gauge is at or above the 45 foot level, this regulation will
extend west to MM 476.0 on the Ohio River in Cincinnati, OH. The Coast
Guard will issue a written Local Notice to Mariners and Broadcast
Notice to Mariners via VFH-FM marine channel 16 about the special local
regulation, and this rule allows vessels to seek permission from the
COTP or a designated representative to enter the area.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any
vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

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

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

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

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and
Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast
Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of
a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves a
special local regulation from 12 p.m. on September 4, 2022 until 3 a.m.
on September 5, 2022 that prohibits vessels from operating above no
wake speeds on all navigable waters of the Ohio River between MM 464-
479 and the Licking River between MM 0.0-0.3. In the event the Ohio
River Gauge is at or above the 45 foot level, this regulation will
extend west to MM 476.0 on the Ohio River in Cincinnati, OH. It is
categorically

excluded from further review under paragraph L61 of Appendix A, Table 1
of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 1.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to call or email the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so
that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100

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

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 100 as follows:

PART 100--SAFETY OF LIFE ON NAVIGABLE WATERS

0
1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70041; 33 CFR 1.05-1.

0
2. Add Sec.  100.T08-0614 Special Local Regulation, Ohio River,
Cincinnati, OH.
    (a) Location. All navigable waters of the Ohio River between MM
464-479 and the Licking River between MM 0.0-0.3. In the event the Ohio
River Gauge is at or above the 45 foot level, this regulation will
extend west to MM 476.0 on the Ohio River in Cincinnati, OH.
    (b) Period of Enforcement. This special local regulation will be
enforced from 12 p.m. on September 4, 2022 through 3 a.m. on September
5, 2022.
    (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
Sec.  100.35 of this part, all vessels entering the zone described in
paragraph (a) of this section are prohibited from operating above no
wake speeds unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port
(COTP) or a designated representative. Persons or vessels desiring to
operate above no wake speeds must request permission from the COTP or a
designated representative. They may be contacted on VHF-FM radio
channel 16 or phone at 1-800-253-7465.
    (2) Persons and vessels permitted to deviate from this special
local regulation must transit at the slowest safe speed and comply with
all lawful directions issued by the COTP or a designated
representative.
    (d) Informational broadcasts. The COTP or a designated
representative will inform the public through broadcast notice to
mariners of the enforcement period of the special local regulation as
well as any changes in the planned schedule.

    Dated: August 9, 2022
H.R. Mattern,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Ohio Valley.
[FR Doc. 2022-17586 Filed 8-15-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 230 (Friday, November 29, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 65666-65668]
[FR Doc No: 2019-25884]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0995; Product Identifier AD-2019-00113-E;
Amendment 39-21001; AD 2019-25-01]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; International Aero Engines, LLC
Turbofan Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain International Aero Engines, LLC (IAE LLC) PW1122G-JM, PW1124G-
JM, PW1124G1-JM, PW1127G1-JM, PW1127GA-JM, PW1127G-JM, PW1129G-JM,
PW1130G-JM, PW1133GA-JM, PW1133G-JM model turbofan engines. This AD
requires replacement of certain low-pressure turbine (LPT) 3rd-stage
blades. This AD was prompted by multiple reports of LPT 3rd-stage blade
failures causing a reduction of engine thrust. The FAA is issuing this
AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective December 16, 2019.
    The FAA must receive comments on this AD by January 13, 2020.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this final rule, contact
International Aero Engines, LLC, 400 Main Street, East Hartford, CT
06118, United States; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
website: https://fleetcare.pw.utc.com. You may view this service
information at the FAA, Engine and Propeller Standards Branch, 1200
District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also
available on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-0995.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-
0995; 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 regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The street address for the Docket Operations is
listed above. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after
receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kevin M. Clark, Aerospace Engineer,
ECO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803; phone:
(781) 238-7088; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The FAA received reports of approximately 21 failures of the
affected LPT 3rd-stage blades from 2017 through June 2019. These
failures appear to be caused by impact damage occurring when debris
passes through the engine. The manufacturer has determined the need to
replace any affected LPT 3rd-stage blades with LPT blades made of a
different material that is more resistant to impact damage.
    In response to these events, the FAA issued a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM), Product Identifier 2019-NE-31-AD (84 FR 64441,
November 22, 2019), proposing to adopt a new AD to address LPT 3rd-
stage blade failures on certain IAE LLC PW1122G-JM, PW1124G-JM,
PW1124G1-JM, PW1127G1-JM, PW1127GA-JM, PW1127G-JM, PW1129G-JM, PW1130G-
JM, PW1133GA-JM, PW1133G-JM model turbofan engines. This NPRM AD
proposes removal from service of affected LPT 3rd-stage blades at the
next engine shop visit.

    Since June 2019, and prior to the publication of NPRM Product
Identifier 2019-NE-31-AD, 20 additional failures of the affected LPT
3rd-stage blades have occurred. The investigation of these failures is
on-going. These additional failures have occurred primarily on engines
operated by certain airlines. This AD requires an accelerated timeframe
for replacement of the affected LPT 3rd-stage blades on certain serial-
numbered engines being operated by these airlines. Based on publication
of NPRM Product Identifier 2019-NE-31-AD, the FAA would still require
replacement of the affected LPT 3rd-stage blades on the remaining
affected engines at the next engine shop visit.
    This condition, if not addressed, could result in failure of the
LPT 3rd-stage blades, failure of one or more engines, loss of thrust
control, and loss of the airplane. The FAA is issuing this AD to
address the unsafe condition on these products.

Related Service Information

    The FAA reviewed Pratt & Whitney Service Bulletin PW1000G-C-72-00-
0111-00A-930A-D, Issue No. 002, dated October 18, 2019. The service
information describes procedures for removal of the affected LPT 3rd-
stage blades and their replacement with parts eligible for
installation.

FAA's Determination

    The FAA is issuing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.

AD Requirements

    This AD requires, within the times specified in the compliance
section of this AD, removal from service of LPT 3rd-stage blades part
number (P/N) 5387343, 5387493, 5387473, or 5387503, and their
replacement with parts eligible for installation.

FAA's Justification and Determination of the Effective Date

    An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of
this AD. The FAA has found the risk to the flying public justifies
waiving notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule because no
domestic operators use this product. It is unlikely that the FAA will
receive any adverse comments or useful information about this AD from
U.S. operators. Therefore, the FAA finds good cause that notice and
opportunity for prior public comment are unnecessary. In addition, for
the reason stated above, the FAA finds that good cause exists for
making this amendment effective in less than 30 days.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety and was not preceded by notice and an opportunity for public
comment. However, the FAA invites you to send any written data, views,
or arguments about this final rule. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number FAA-2019-
0995 and Product Identifier AD-2019-00113-E at the beginning of your
comments. The FAA specifically invites comments on the overall
regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this final
rule. The FAA will consider all comments received by the closing date
and may amend this final rule because of those comments.
    The FAA will post all comments received, without change, to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide.
The FAA will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal
contact received about this final rule.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) do not
apply when an agency finds good cause pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553 to adopt
a rule without prior notice and comment. Because the FAA has determined
that it has good cause to adopt this rule without notice and comment,
RFA analysis is not required.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 0 engines installed on
airplanes of U.S. registry.
    The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
              Action                     Labor cost            Parts cost           product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replace set of LPC 3rd-stage        408 work-hours x $85  $750,000 per blade          $784,680               $0
 blades.                             per hour = $34,680.   set.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.
    This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the
Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by
FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is
normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but
during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the
authority to issue ADs applicable to engines, propellers, and
associated appliances to the Manager, Engine and Propeller Standards
Branch, Policy and Innovation Division.

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, and
    (2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of 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 (AD):

2019-25-01 International Aero Engines LLC: Amendment 39-21001;
Docket No. FAA-2019-0995; Product Identifier AD-2019-00113-E.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective December 16, 2019.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to International Aero Engines, LLC (IAE LLC)
PW1122G-JM, PW1124G-JM, PW1124G1-JM, PW1127G1-JM, PW1127GA-JM,
PW1127G-JM, PW1129G-JM, PW1130G-JM, PW1133GA-JM, PW1133G-JM model
turbofan engines with an engine serial number listed in paragraphs
(g)(1) through (4) of this AD and with low-pressure turbine (LPT)
3rd-stage blades, part number (P/N) 5387343, 5387493, 5387473 or
5387503.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association
(ATA) of America Code 7250, Turbine Section.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of failure of certain LPT 3rd-
stage blades. The FAA is issuing this AD to prevent failure of these
LPT 3rd-stage blades. The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could
result in failure of the LPT 3rd-stage blades, failure of one or
more engines, loss of thrust control, and loss of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Required Actions

    For any IAE LLC LPT 3rd-stage blade, P/N 5387343, 5387493,
5387473, or 5387503, and with an engine serial number specified in
paragraph (g)(1) through (4) of this AD, remove the affected blade
from service within the times specified in paragraphs (g)(1) through
(4) of this AD and replace with a part eligible for installation.
    (1) Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD or at the
next engine shop visit, whichever comes first, for engines with
serial numbers: P770536; P770620; P770626; P770641; P770644;
P770681; P770690; P770693; P770773; P770780; P770813; P770816;
P770827; P770841; P770852; P770869; P770870; P770873; P770883;
P770894; P770909; P770512; P770762; P770484; P770805; P770716;
P770836; or P770942.
    (2) Within 180 days after the effective date of this AD or at
the next engine shop visit, whichever comes first, for engines with
serial numbers: P770347; P770981; P770814; P770825; P770964;
P770622; P770763; P771019; P770980; P770985; P771048; P770487;
P770911; P770960; P770932; P770934; P770444; P770993; P770996;
P770893; P770320; P771036; P771040; P770797; P771047; P770537;
P771026; P771050; P771046; P771074; P771062; P771080; P771099;
P771164; or P770984.
    (3) Within 270 days after the effective date of this AD or at
the next engine shop visit, whichever comes first, for engines with
serial numbers: P770966; P770482; P770170; P770272; P770646;
P771167; P770495; P771162; P770463; P770853; P771015; P771032;
P771165; P771170; P771092; P771093; P771174; P771135; P770597;
P771113; P770469; P771154; P770244; P771059; P770287; P770740;
P771107; P771118; P770366; P770607; P770577; P771219; P771258;
P771207; P771211; P771138; P771140; P770594; P771020; P771279;
P771280; P770499; P770279; P771273; P770978; or P770916.
    (4) Within 360 days after the effective date of this AD or at
the next engine shop visit, whichever comes first, for engines with
serial numbers: P770579; P771188; P770722; P770603; P770715;
P770768; P771120; P771132; P770782; P771288; P770504; P771238;
P770676; P770128; P770191; P771277; P770749; P770800; P770381;
P770395; P770218; P770374; P770256; P770452; P770460; P771141;
P770138; P770750; P770645; P770756; P770308; P770143; P770439;
P770509; P770127; P770139; P770172; P770176; P770129; P770140;
P770173; P770640; P770742; P771006; P770505; P771161; P770315;
P770263; P770724; P770259; P770149; P770269; P770486; P770614;
P770975; P770946; P770629; or P771166.

(h) Definitions

    (1) For the purpose of this AD, an ``engine shop visit'' is the
induction of an engine into the shop for maintenance involving the
separation of pairs of major mating engine flanges, except that the
separation of engine flanges solely for the purposes of
transportation of the engine without subsequent engine maintenance
does not constitute an engine shop visit.
    (2) For the purpose of this AD, a ``part eligible for
installation'' is any LPT 3rd-stage blade that does not have a P/N
5387343, 5387493, 5387473, or 5387503.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, ECO 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 local Flight Standards District Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the
certification office, send it to the attention of the person
identified in paragraph (j) of this AD. You may email your request
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

(j) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Kevin M. Clark,
Aerospace Engineer, ECO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue,
Burlington, MA 01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    None.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on November 25, 2019.
Robert J. Ganley,
Manager, Engine and Propeller Standards Branch, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-25884 Filed 11-26-19; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 29 (Tuesday, February 12, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3305-3308]
[FR Doc No: 2019-01922]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2017-0490; FRL-9988-60-Region 9]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California;
South Coast Serious Area Plan for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS

AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving
portions of a state implementation plan (SIP) revision submitted by
California to address Clean Air Act (CAA or ``Act'') requirements for
the 2006 24-hour fine particulate matter (PM2.5) national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS or ``standards'') in the Los
Angeles-South Coast air basin (South Coast) Serious PM2.5
nonattainment area. The EPA is also approving 2017 and 2019 motor
vehicle emissions budgets for transportation conformity purposes and
inter-pollutant trading ratios for use in transportation conformity
analyses.

DATES: This final rule is effective on March 14, 2019.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-2017-0490. All documents in the docket are
listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in
the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g.,
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available through https://www.regulations.gov, or please
contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section for additional availability information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ginger Vagenas, EPA Region IX, 415-
972-3964<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,''
and ``our'' refer to the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    Epidemiological studies have shown statistically significant
correlations between elevated levels of PM2.5 (particulate
matter with a diameter of 2.5 microns or less) and premature mortality.
Other important health effects associated with PM2.5
exposure include aggravation of respiratory and cardiovascular disease,
changes in lung function, and increased respiratory symptoms.
Individuals particularly sensitive to PM2.5 exposure include
older adults, people with heart and lung disease, and children.\1\
PM2.5 can be emitted directly into the atmosphere as a solid
or liquid particle (``primary PM2.5'' or ``direct
PM2.5'') or can be formed in the atmosphere as a result of
various chemical reactions among precursor pollutants such as nitrogen
oxides, sulfur oxides, volatile organic compounds, and ammonia
(``secondary PM2.5'').\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 78 FR 3086, 3088 (January 15, 2013).
    \2\ 72 FR 20586, 20589 (April 25, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA first established NAAQS for PM2.5 on July 18,
1997.\3\ On October 17, 2006, the EPA revised the 24-hour NAAQS for
PM2.5 to provide increased protection of public health by
lowering the level from 65 micrograms per cubic meter ([micro]g/m\3\)
to 35 [micro]g/m\3\.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 62 FR 38652. The initial NAAQS for PM2.5 included
annual standards of 15.0 [micro]g/m\3\ based on a 3-year average of
annual mean PM2.5 concentrations and 24-hour (daily)
standards of 65 [micro]g/m\3\ based on a 3-year average of 98th
percentile 24-hour concentrations (40 CFR 50.7).
    \4\ 40 CFR 50.13 and 71 FR 61144. In 2012, the EPA revised the
annual standards to lower them to 12 [micro]g/m\3\ (78 FR 3086
(January 15, 2013), codified at 40 CFR 50.18). Unless otherwise
noted, all references to the PM2.5 standards in this
notice are to the 2006 24-hour NAAQS of 35 [micro]g/m\3\ codified at
40 CFR 50.13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Following promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, the EPA is
required by CAA section 107(d) to designate areas throughout the nation
as attaining or not attaining the NAAQS. On November 13, 2009, the EPA
designated the South Coast as nonattainment for the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 standards.\5\ This designation became effective on
December 14, 2009.\6\ On June 2, 2014, the EPA classified the South
Coast area as ``Moderate'' nonattainment for both the 1997
PM2.5 standards and the 2006 PM2.5 standards
under subpart 4 of part D, title I of the Act.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 74 FR 58688.
    \6\ 40 CFR 81.305.
    \7\ 79 FR 31566. The EPA took this action in response to a
decision of the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit finding that
the EPA had erred in implementing the PM2.5 NAAQS
pursuant solely to the general implementation provisions of subpart
1 of Part D, Title I of the Act, without also considering the
particulate matter-specific provisions of subpart 4 of Part D.
Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C.
Cir. 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On January 13, 2016, the EPA published a final rule reclassifying
the South Coast area as ``Serious'' nonattainment under subpart 4,
based on the EPA's determination that the area could not practicably
attain the 2006 PM2.5 standards by the Moderate area
attainment date, which was December 31, 2015.\8\ This reclassification
became effective on February 12, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 81 FR 1514.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The local air district with primary responsibility for developing a
plan to attain the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in this area is the
South Coast Air Quality Management District (``District'' or SCAQMD).
The District works cooperatively with the California Air Resources
Board (CARB) in preparing these plans. State authority for regulating
sources in the South Coast is split between the District, which has
responsibility for regulating stationary and most area sources, and
CARB, which has responsibility for regulating most mobile sources and
some categories of consumer products.
    As a consequence of its reclassification as a Serious
PM2.5 nonattainment area, the South Coast became subject to
a new attainment date under CAA section 188(c)(2) and to the
requirement to submit a Serious area plan that satisfies the
requirements of part D of title I of the Act, including the
requirements of subpart 4, for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.\9\ As
explained in the EPA's final reclassification action, the Serious area
plan for the South Coast must include provisions to assure that the
best available control measures (BACM) for the control of direct
PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors will be implemented no
later than 4 years after the area is reclassified (CAA section
189(b)(1)(B)), and a demonstration (including air quality modeling)
that the plan provides for attainment as expeditiously as practicable
but no later than December 31, 2019, which is the latest permissible
attainment date under CAA section 188(c)(2).\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 81 FR 1514, 1518 (January 13, 2016).
    \10\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On October 3, 2018, we proposed to approve portions of a SIP
revision submitted by California to address CAA requirements for the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in South Coast Serious
nonattainment area.\11\ The submitted SIP revision is the ``Final 2016
Air Quality Management Plan (March 2017),'' adopted by the SCAQMD
Governing Board on March 3, 2017 (``2016 PM2.5 Plan'' or
``Plan''). CARB submitted the 2016 PM2.5 Plan to the EPA on
April 27, 2017.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 83 FR 49872.
    \12\ Letter dated April 27, 2017, from Richard Corey, Executive
Officer, CARB, to Alexis Strauss, Acting Regional Administrator, EPA
Region IX, with enclosures. Our proposed rule erroneously stated
that we were also proposing to act on CARB's ``2016 State Strategy
for the State Implementation Plan (March 2017),'' also submitted on
April 27, 2017. That submission, however, is not a necessary
component of the 2016 PM2.5 Plan. See email dated November 15, 2018,
from Scott King, CARB, to Ginger Vagenas, EPA Region IX, Subject:
``RE: question about SC 2006 PM2.5 Plan.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA proposed to approve the following portions of the 2016
PM2.5 Plan under CAA section 110(k)(3): The 2012 base year
emissions inventory, provisions assuring that BACM, including best
available control technology (BACT), for the control of direct
PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors will be implemented no
later than 4 years after the area was reclassified, the demonstration
(including air quality modeling) that the plan provides for attainment
as expeditiously as practicable but no later than December 31, 2019,
provisions that require reasonable further progress (RFP) toward
attainment by the applicable attainment date, quantitative milestones
that are to be achieved every 3 years until the area is redesignated
attainment and that demonstrate RFP, and 2017 and 2019 motor vehicle
emissions budgets.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 83 FR 49872.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA also proposed to approve the inter-pollutant trading
mechanism provided in the 2016 PM2.5 Plan and clarified in a
March 14, 2018 letter from the District, for use in transportation
conformity analyses for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, in accordance
with 40 CFR 93.124. Finally, the EPA proposed to find that the
requirement for contingency measures to be undertaken if the area fails
to make reasonable further progress under CAA section 172(c)(9) is moot
as applied to the 2017 milestone year because the State and District
have demonstrated to the EPA's satisfaction that the 2017 milestones
have been met. The rationale for our proposed action is included in the
proposal and will not be restated here. We did not propose any action
on the attainment contingency measure component of the 2016
PM2.5 Plan.

II. Public Comments and EPA Responses

    The EPA's proposed action provided a 30-day public comment period
that ended on November 2, 2018. During this comment period, we received
three

anonymous comments. Two of these commenters expressed criticism of a
political nature unrelated to this action specifically or to
environmental protection generally. The third commenter raised concerns
about the damage and risks associated with hydraulic fracturing
(commonly referred to as ``fracking''). Hydraulic fracturing is not
addressed in this action. After reviewing these comments, we have
concluded that they are outside the scope of our proposed action and
fail to identify any material issue necessitating a response. The
comments have been added to the docket for this action and are
accessible at https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EPA-R09-OAR-2017-0490.

III. Final Action

    The EPA is taking final action to approve portions of the 2016
PM2.5 Plan submitted by the State of California to address
attainment of the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in the South Coast
PM2.5 Serious nonattainment area. We are finalizing approval
of the following elements of the 2016 PM2.5 Plan under CAA
section 110(k)(3):
    1. The 2012 base year emission inventories (CAA section 172(c)(3));
    2. the demonstration that BACM, including BACT, for the control of
direct PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors will be
implemented no later than 4 years after the area was reclassified (CAA
section 189(b)(1)(B));
    3. the demonstration (including air quality modeling) that the Plan
provides for attainment as expeditiously as practicable but no later
than December 31, 2019 (CAA sections 188(c)(2) and 189(b)(1)(A));
    4. Plan provisions that require RFP toward attainment by the
applicable date (CAA section 172(c)(2));
    5. quantitative milestones that are to be achieved every 3 years
until the area is redesignated attainment and that demonstrate RFP
toward attainment by the applicable date (CAA section 189(c));
    6. motor vehicle emissions budgets for 2017 and 2019, as shown in
Table 1 (CAA section 176(c) and 40 CFR part 93, subpart A); and
    7. the inter-pollutant trading mechanism provided in the 2016
PM2.5 Plan and clarified in a March 14, 2018 letter from the
District, for use in transportation conformity analyses for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS, in accordance with 40 CFR 93.124.

                                            Table 1--Budgets for the South Coast for the 2006 PM2.5 Standard
                                                              [Average annual tons per day]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     2017 (RFP year)                                 2019 (attainment year)
                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         PM2.5             NOX              VOC             PM2.5             NOX              VOC
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budgets...........................................              21              200               99               20              169               83
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We are also finalizing our proposal to determine that the
requirement for contingency measures to be undertaken if the area fails
to make reasonable further progress under CAA section 172(c)(9) is moot
as applied to the 2017 milestone year because CARB and the District
have demonstrated to the EPA's satisfaction that the 2017 milestones
have been met.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves State law as meeting federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by State
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
     does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     does not provide the EPA with the discretionary authority
to address disproportionate human health or environmental effects with
practical, appropriate, and legally permissible methods under Executive
Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe
has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not
impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal
law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this action 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. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by April 15, 2019. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Ammonia,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Oxides of
nitrogen, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: December 12, 2018.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.

    Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart F--California

0
2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(513)(ii)(B) to
read as follows:

Sec.  52.220  Identification of plan--in part.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (513) * * *
    (ii) * * *
    (B) South Coast Air Quality Management District. (1) The following
portions of the ``Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan (March
2017),'' adopted March 3, 2017: Chapter 5 (``PM2.5 Modeling
Approach''), pages 5-17 through 5-27; Appendix III (``Base and Future
Emission Inventory''), Attachment A (``Annual Average Emissions by
Source Category in South Coast Air Basin'') for PM2.5,
NOX, SO2, VOC, and NH3 for years 2012, 2017,
2019, and 2020 and Attachment D, tables D-1, D-3, D-7 and D-9; Appendix
IV-A (``SCAQMD's Stationary and Mobile Source Control Measures''),
Table IV-A-4 and section 2 (``PM2.5 Control Measures'');
Appendix IV-C (``Regional Transportation Strategy and Control
Measures''), section IV (``TCM Best Available Control Measure (BACM)
Analysis for 2006 24-Hour and 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS'');
Appendix V (``Modeling and Attainment Demonstration''), Chapter 7
(``24-hour PM2.5 Demonstration'') and Attachment 8 (``24-
hour Unmonitored Area Analysis Supplement''); Appendix VI-A
(``Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM)/Best Available Control
Measures (BACM) Demonstration''), pages VI-A-13 through VI-A-42,
Attachment VI-A-1 (``Evaluation of SCAQMD Rules and Regulations''),
Attachment VI-A-2 (``Control Measure Assessment''), and Attachment VI-
A-3 (``California Mobile Source Control Program Best Available Control
Measures/Reasonably Available Control Measures Assessment''); Appendix
VI-C (``Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) and Milestone Years''), pages
VI-C-5 through VI-C-8, and Attachment VI-C-1 (``California Existing
Mobile Source Control Program''); Appendix VI-D (``General Conformity
and Transportation Conformity Budget''), pages VI-D-2 through VI-D-6
and excluding tables VI-D-1 through 3; and Appendix VI-F (``Precursor
Requirements'').
    (2) Letter dated March 14, 2018 from Philip Fine, Deputy Executive
Officer, Planning, Rule Development, and Area Sources, South Coast Air
Quality Management District, to Amy Zimpfer, Associate Director, Air
Division, EPA Region IX.
    (3) Letter dated June 15, 2018 from Philip Fine, Deputy Executive
Officer, Planning, Rule Development, and Area Sources, South Coast Air
Quality Management District, to Amy Zimpfer, Associate Director, Air
Division, EPA Region IX, regarding ``Condensable and Filterable
Portions of PM2.5 Emissions in the 2016 AQMD.''
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2019-01922 Filed 2-11-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 228 (Friday, November 27, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 74103]
[FR Doc No: 2015-30114]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2014-0486; FRL-9933-45-OEI]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; Lead Training, Certification, Accreditation
and Authorization Activities

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: EPA has submitted the following information collection request
(ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and
approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA): ``Lead
Training, Certification, Accreditation and Authorization Activities''
and identified by EPA ICR No. 2507.01 and OMB Control No. 2070-NEW. The
ICR, which is available in the docket along with other related
materials, provides a detailed explanation of the collection activities
and the burden estimate that is only briefly summarized in this
document. EPA did not receive any comments in response to the
previously provided public review opportunity issued in the Federal
Register on December 29, 2014 (79 FR 78084). With this submission, EPA
is providing an additional 30 days for public review.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 28, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2014-0486, to both EPA and OMB as follows:
     To EPA online using http://www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method) or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental
Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460.
     To OMB via email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Address
comments to OMB Desk Officer for EPA.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
docket without change, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to
be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be CBI or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Colby Lintner, Environmental
Assistance Division (7408M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Docket: Supporting documents, including the ICR that explains in
detail the information collection activities and the related burden and
cost estimates that are summarized in this document, are available in
the docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at http://www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, West William
Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is (202)
566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit
http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    ICR status: This is a new ICR. that seeks to consolidate the
information collection activities that are currently covered by the
following three ICRs that are currently approved by OMB under the
separate OMB control numbers identified:
    1. OMB Control No. 2070-0155; EPA ICR No. 1715.14; entitled ``TSCA
Sections 402 and Section 404 Training, Certification, Accreditation and
Standards for Lead-Based Paint Activities and Renovation, Repair, and
Painting''; approved through August 31, 2018.
    2. OMB Control No. 2070-0158; EPA ICR No. 1669.07; entitled ``Lead-
Based Paint Pre-Renovation Information Dissemination--TSCA Sec.
406(b)''; approved through August 31, 2018.
    3. OMB Control No. 2070-0181; EPA ICR No. 2381.03; entitled ``ICR
for the Final Rule entitled ``Lead; Clearance and Clearance Testing
Requirements for the Renovation, Repair, and Painting Program'';
approved through August 31, 2018.
    Under PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., an agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of
information, unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
The OMB control numbers are displayed either by publication in the
Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such as on the related
collection instrument or form, if applicable. The display of OMB
control numbers for certain EPA regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR
part 9.
    Abstract: This consolidated ICR will cover the information
collection activities imposed on entities conducting lead-based paint
related activities currently approved in the ICRs listed above.
Following approval of this ICR, the previous ICRs will be discontinued.
    Respondents/Affected entities: Private entities and state,
territorial or Native American agencies who are engaged in or who
administer lead-based paint activities or programs.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (see 40 CFR part
745). Respondents may claim all or part of a document confidential. EPA
will disclose information that is covered by a claim of confidentiality
only to the extent permitted by, and in accordance with, the procedures
in TSCA section 14 and 40 CFR part 2.
    Estimated total number of potential respondents: 791,805.
    Frequency of response: On occasion.
    Estimated total burden: 5,746,565 hours (per year). Burden is
defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Estimated total costs: $283,187,555 (per year), includes no
annualized capital investment or maintenance and operational costs.
    Changes in the estimates: There is an overall decrease of 282,737
hours in the total estimated combined respondent burden that is
currently approved by OMB in the three ICRs consolidated in this
request. This decrease reflects changes in EPA's estimates of the
number of respondents and burden-related activities based on economic
conditions in the housing market and related industries. Further, the
fact that the 2008 Renovation, Repair and Painting (RRP) rule and the
2010 Opt-Out rule have been in place for several years allows this ICR
to use estimates based on actual certification data instead of making
broader assumptions about industry behavior. Further details about
these changes are included in the supporting statement for this ICR.
This change is an adjustment.

    Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

Courtney Kerwin,
Acting Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2015-30114 Filed 11-25-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: April 27, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 81)]
[Notices]
[Page 24876-24878]
[DOCID:fr27ap06-83]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-53686; File No. SR-CHX-2005-27]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc.;
Order Granting Approval of a Proposed Rule Change and Amendment Nos. 1,
2, and 3 To Amend Exchange Delisting Rules To Conform to Recent
Amendments to Commission Rules Regarding Removal From Listing and
Withdrawal From Registration

April 20, 2006.

I. Introduction

    On October 17, 2005, the Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc. (``CHX'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission''), pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'')\1\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to amend Exchange delisting rules
to conform to recent amendments to Commission rules regarding removal
from listing and withdrawal from registration. On December 14, 2005,

CHX filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change.\3\ On February
17, 2006, CHX filed Amendment No. 2 to the proposed rule change.\4\ On
March 15, 2006, CHX filed Amendment No. 3 to the proposal.\5\ The
proposed rule change, as amended, was published for comment in the
Federal Register on March 21, 2006.\6\ No comments were received
regarding the proposal. This order approves the proposed rule change,
as amended.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ In Amendment No. 1, CHX made several changes to the proposed
rule text of CHX Article XXVIII, Rule 4 to clarify the organization
of the Rule; incorporate the requirement that issuers provide notice
to the Exchange upon filing a Form 25; and clarify the effective
dates for the old and the new CHX Rule 4.
    \4\ In Amendment No. 2, CHX included new language to the
proposed rule text of CHX Article XXVIII, Rule 4 relating to the
timing of certain issuer obligations under amended SEC Rule 12d2-2
and made other grammatical corrections to the proposed rule text.
    \5\ In Amendment No. 3, CHX included new language to the
proposed rule text of CHX Article XXVIII, Rule 4 stating that if an
issuer seeks to voluntarily withdraw its securities from listing and
has either received notice from the Exchange that it is below the
Exchange's continued listing policies and standards, or is aware
that it is below such continued listing policies and standards even
if it has not received such notice from the Exchange, the issuer
must disclose that it is no longer eligible for continued listing
(including the specific continued listing policies and standards
that the issue is below) in: (i) Its written notice to the Exchange
of its determination to withdraw from listing required by amended
Rule 12d2-2(c)(2)(ii) under the Act; and (ii) its public press
release and website notice required by amended Rule 12d2-
2(c)(2)(iii) under the Act.
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53493 (March 16,
2006), 71 FR 14265.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change

    Section 12 of the Act\7\ and Rule 12d2-2 thereunder\8\ (``SEC Rule
12d2-2'') govern the process for the delisting and deregistration of
securities listed on national securities exchanges. Recent amendments
to SEC Rule 12d2-2 (``amended SEC Rule 12d2-2'') and other Commission
rules require the electronic filing of revised Form 25 on the
Commission's Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval
(``EDGAR'') system by exchanges and issuers for all delistings, other
than delistings of standardized options and securities futures, which
are exempted.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78l.
    \8\ 17 CFR 240.12d2-2.
    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52029 (July 14,
2005), 70 FR 42456 (July 22, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the case of exchange-initiated delistings, amended SEC Rule
12d2-2(b) states that a national securities exchange may file an
application on Form 25 to strike a class of securities from listing
and/or withdraw the registration of such securities, in accordance with
its rules, if the rules of such exchange, at a minimum, provide for:
\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See also Form 8-K (Item 3.01. Notice of Delisting or
Failure to Satisfy a Continued Listing Rule or Standard; Transfer of
Listing), which sets forth disclosure requirements for issuers that
do not satisfy listing standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (i) Notice to the issuer of the exchange's decision to delist its
securities;
    (ii) An opportunity for appeal to the exchange's board of
directors, or to a committee designated by the board; and
    (iii) Public notice of the national securities exchange's final
determination to remove the security from listing and/or registration,
by issuing a press release and posting notice on its Web site. Public
notice must be disseminated no fewer than 10 days before the delisting
becomes effective pursuant to amended SEC Rule 12d2-2(d)(1), and must
remain posted on its Web site until the delisting is effective.
    The Exchange proposes to amend the text of its Article XXVIII, Rule
4 relating to the delisting of securities to comply with the
requirements of recently amended SEC Rule 12d2-2. With respect to the
above requirements set forth in amended SEC Rule 12d2-2(b), CHX Article
XXVIII, Rule 4 currently provides the requisite issuer notice as well
as an opportunity for appeal to a committee designated by the Board. As
required under amended SEC Rule 12d2-2(b)(1), CHX proposes to state in
CHX Article XXVIII, Rule 4(f) that when a final determination is made
with respect to the delisting of one or more securities of an issuer,
the Exchange's Secretary promptly would provide public notice of that
determination by issuing a press release and posting notice on the
Exchange's Web site. This notice would be disseminated no fewer than 10
days before the delisting becomes effective and would remain posted on
the Exchange's Web site until the delisting is effective. The proposed
rule change also states that the Exchange will file Form 25 with the
Commission and provide a copy to the issuer.
    In the case of an issuer-initiated delisting, CHX Article XXVIII,
Rule 4 currently requires that in the absence of special circumstances,
a security would not be removed from listing and/or registration upon
application of the issuer, unless the issuer files with the Exchange a
certified copy of a resolution adopted by the board of directors of the
issuer authorizing withdrawal from listing and registration. This
provision would be retained in the CHX's amended Rule. CHX's proposal
would add a new requirement that the issuer must file a copy of Form 25
with the Exchange immediately after filing the Form 25 with the
Commission.
    In addition, CHX proposes revisions to CHX Article XXVIII, Rule
4(b) that would set forth, in general terms, the process that should be
followed pursuant to amended SEC Rule 12d2-2 when an issuer seeks to
voluntarily withdraw the listing or registration of a security on the
Exchange. In such instances, CHX proposes to require the issuer to:
    (i) Comply with the Exchange's rules for delisting and applicable
state laws;
    (ii) Submit written notice to the Exchange, no fewer than ten days
before filing a Form 25, of its intent to withdraw its security; and
    (iii) Issue public notice of its intent to withdraw from listing
and registration; and
    (iv) File Form 25 with the Commission.
    CHX also proposes that an issuer seeking to voluntarily apply to
withdraw a class of securities from listing on the Exchange that has
received notice from the Exchange that it is below the Exchange's
continued listing policies and standards, or that is aware that it is
below such continued listing policies and standards notwithstanding
that it has not received such notice from the Exchange, must disclose
that it is no longer eligible for continued listing (including the
specific continued listing policies and standards that the issue is
below) in: (i) Its written notice of its determination to withdraw from
listing required by amended SEC Rule 12d2-2(c)(2)(ii) and; (ii) its
public press release and Web site notice required by amended SEC Rule
12d2-2(c)(2)(iii).
    Finally, the proposal makes other non-substantive changes (such as
inserting headings and making the text part of the rule itself, rather
than an interpretation to the rule) that are designed to make the rule
easier to read.

III. Discussion

    The Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange \11\ and, in
particular, the requirements of section 6 of the Act.\12\ Specifically,
as discussed below, the Commission finds that the proposal is
consistent with section 6(b)(5) of the

Act,\13\ which requires, in part, that the rules of an exchange be
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing,
settling, and processing information with respect to, and facilitating
transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest. Further, as
noted in more detail below, the changes being adopted by CHX meet the
requirements of amended SEC Rule 12d2-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ In approving this proposal, the Commission has considered
the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital
formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Exchange Delisting

    Amended SEC Rule 12d2-2(b) states that a national securities
exchange may file an application on Form 25 to strike a class of
securities from listing and/or withdraw the registration of such
securities, in accordance with its rules, if the rules of such
exchange, at a minimum, provide for notice to the issuer of the
exchange's decision to delist, opportunity for appeal, and public
notice of the exchange's final determination to delist. The Commission
believes that CHX's current rules and proposal comply with the dictates
of amended SEC Rule 12d2-2(b).
    CHX Article XXVIII, Rule 4 currently provides the requisite issuer
notice as well as an opportunity for appeal to a committee designated
by the Board. Specifically, issuers may appeal the Hearing Examiner's
delisting determinations to the Board's Executive Committee.\14\ In
addition, the proposed rule change will provide for public notice of
the Exchange's final determination to remove the security from listing
and/or registration. This should ensure that investors have adequate
notice of an exchange delisting and is consistent with the protection
of investors under section 6(b)(5) of the Act.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See CHX Article XXVIII, Article 4.
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Issuer Voluntary Delisting

    In the case of an issuer-initiated delisting, CHX proposes
revisions to CHX Article XXVIII, Rule 4(b) that would set forth, in
general terms, the process that should be followed when an issuer seeks
to voluntarily withdraw the listing or registration of a security on
the Exchange, including the issuer's obligation to file Form 25 with
the Commission (and to submit it to the Exchange) and the Exchange's
obligation to provide public notice of an issuer's voluntary request to
delist securities. In the case of an issuer-initiated delisting, CHX
proposes to require the issuer to:
    (i) Comply with the Exchange's rules for delisting and applicable
state laws;
    (ii) Submit written notice to the Exchange, no fewer than ten days
before filing a Form 25, of its intent to withdraw its security; and
    (iii) Issue public notice of its intent to withdraw from listing
and registration; and
    (iv) File Form 25 with the Commission.
    The Commission believes that the amendments will fully inform
issuers of the requirements for voluntary delisting of their securities
under CHX rules and federal securities laws.
    The proposal also sets forth a new requirement not in amended SEC
Rule 12d2-2 that would require the issuer to file a copy of Form 25
with the Exchange immediately after filing Form 25 with the Commission.
This requirement will allow the Exchange to be fully informed of the
actual filing of a Form 25 and be prepared to take timely action to
delist the security in accordance with the filing of the Form.
    CHX also proposes that an issuer seeking to voluntarily apply to
withdraw a class of securities from listing on the Exchange that has
received notice from the Exchange that it is below the Exchange's
continued listing policies and standards, or that is aware that it is
below such continued listing policies and standards notwithstanding
that it has not received such notice from the Exchange, must disclose
that it is no longer eligible for continued listing (including the
specific continued listing policies and standards that the issue is
below) in: (i) Its statement of all material facts relating to the
reasons for withdrawal from listing provided to the Exchange along with
written notice of its determination to withdraw from listing required
by amended SEC Rule 12d2-2(c)(2)(ii) and; (ii) its public press release
and Web site notice required by amended SEC Rule 12d2-2(c)(2)(iii). The
Commission believes that this requirement will allow shareholders to be
informed and aware that the issuer has failed to meet Exchange listing
standards and is voluntarily delisting. Issuers will therefore not be
permitted to delist voluntarily without public disclosure of their
noncompliance with Exchange listing standards.

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\16\ that the proposed rule change (File No. SR-CHX-2005-27), as
amended, is approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Id.
    \17\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\17\
J. Lynn Taylor,
Assistant Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-6318 Filed 4-26-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P