[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 225 (Monday, November 23, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 72906-72914]
[FR Doc No: 2015-29799]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 372

[EPA-HQ-TRI-2015-0011; FRL-9937-12-OEI]
RIN 2025-AA41

Addition of 1-Bromopropane; Community Right-to-Know Toxic
Chemical Release Reporting

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is adding 1-
bromopropane to the list of toxic chemicals subject to reporting under
section 313 of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act
(EPCRA) of 1986 and section 6607 of the Pollution Prevention Act (PPA)
of 1990. 1-Bromopropane has been classified by the National Toxicology
Program in their 13th Report on Carcinogens as ``reasonably anticipated
to be a human carcinogen.'' The EPA has determined that 1-bromopropane
meets the EPCRA section 313(d)(2)(B) criteria because it can reasonably
be anticipated to cause cancer in humans.

DATES: This final rule is effective November 30, 2015, and shall apply
for the reporting year beginning January 1, 2016 (reports due July 1,
2017).

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-TRI-2015-0011. All documents in the docket are
listed on the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. 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 electronically through http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daniel R. Bushman, Environmental
Analysis Division, Office of Information Analysis and Access (2842T),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number: 202-
566-0677; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>for specific information on
this notice. For general information on EPCRA section 313, contact the
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Hotline, toll free at
(800) 424-9346 (select menu option 3) or<PHONE_NUMBER> in Virginia and
Alaska or toll free, TDD<PHONE_NUMBER>, http://www.epa.gov/superfund/contacts/infocenter/.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this notice apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you manufacture,
process, or otherwise use 1-bromopropane. Potentially affected
categories and entities may include, but are not limited to:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Examples of potentially affected
             Category                             entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry..........................  Facilities included in the following
                                     NAICS manufacturing codes
                                     (corresponding to SIC codes 20
                                     through 39): 311*, 312*, 313*,
                                     314*, 315*, 316, 321, 322, 323*,
                                     324, 325*, 326*, 327, 331, 332,
                                     333, 334*, 335*, 336, 337*, 339*,
                                     111998*, 211112*, 212324*, 212325*,
                                     212393*, 212399*, 488390*, 511110,
                                     511120, 511130, 511140*, 511191,
                                     511199, 512220, 512230*, 519130*,
                                     541712*, or 811490*.
                                    *Exceptions and/or limitations exist
                                     for these NAICS codes.
                                    Facilities included in the following
                                     NAICS codes (corresponding to SIC
                                     codes other than SIC codes 20
                                     through 39): 212111, 212112, 212113
                                     (correspond to SIC 12, Coal Mining
                                     (except 1241)); or 212221, 212222,
                                     212231, 212234, 212299 (correspond
                                     to SIC 10, Metal Mining (except
                                     1011, 1081, and 1094)); or 221111,
                                     221112, 221113, 221118, 221121,
                                     221122, 221330 (Limited to
                                     facilities that combust coal and/or
                                     oil for the purpose of generating
                                     power for distribution in commerce)
                                     (corresponds to SIC 4911, 4931, and
                                     4939, Electric Utilities); or
                                     424690, 425110, 425120 (Limited to
                                     facilities previously classified in
                                     SIC 5169, Chemicals and Allied
                                     Products, Not Elsewhere
                                     Classified); or 424710 (corresponds
                                     to SIC 5171, Petroleum Bulk
                                     Terminals and Plants); or 562112
                                     (Limited to facilities primarily
                                     engaged in solvent recovery
                                     services on a contract or fee basis
                                     (previously classified under SIC
                                     7389, Business Services, NEC)); or
                                     562211, 562212, 562213, 562219,
                                     562920 (Limited to facilities
                                     regulated under the Resource
                                     Conservation and Recovery Act,
                                     subtitle C, 42 U.S.C. 6921 et seq.)
                                     (corresponds to SIC 4953, Refuse
                                     Systems).
Federal Government................  Federal facilities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Some of the entities listed in the table have exemptions and/or
limitations regarding coverage, and other types of entities not listed
in the table could also be affected. To determine whether your facility
would be affected by this action, you should carefully examine the
applicability criteria in part 372 subpart

B of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations. If you have questions
regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity,
consult the person listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section.

II. Introduction

A. What is the statutory authority for this final rule?

    This rule is issued under EPCRA section 313(d) and section 328, 42
U.S.C. 11023 et seq. EPCRA is also referred to as Title III of the
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986.

B. What is the background for this action?

    Section 313 of EPCRA, 42 U.S.C. 11023, requires certain facilities
that manufacture, process, or otherwise use listed toxic chemicals in
amounts above reporting threshold levels to report their environmental
releases and other waste management quantities of such chemicals
annually. These facilities must also report pollution prevention and
recycling data for such chemicals, pursuant to section 6607 of the PPA,
42 U.S.C. 13106. Congress established an initial list of toxic
chemicals that comprised 308 individually listed chemicals and 20
chemical categories.
    EPCRA section 313(d) authorizes the EPA to add or delete chemicals
from the list and sets criteria for these actions. EPCRA section
313(d)(2) states that the EPA may add a chemical to the list if any of
the listing criteria in Section 313(d)(2) are met. Therefore, to add a
chemical, the EPA must demonstrate that at least one criterion is met,
but need not determine whether any other criterion is met. Conversely,
to remove a chemical from the list, EPCRA section 313(d)(3) dictates
that the EPA must demonstrate that none of the listing criteria in
Section 313(d)(2)(A)-(C) are met. The EPCRA section 313(d)(2)(A)-(C)
criteria are:
     The chemical is known to cause or can reasonably be
anticipated to cause significant adverse acute human health effects at
concentration levels that are reasonably likely to exist beyond
facility site boundaries as a result of continuous, or frequently
recurring, releases.
     The chemical is known to cause or can reasonably be
anticipated to cause in humans:
[cir] Cancer or teratogenic effects, or
[cir] serious or irreversible--

    [ssquf] Reproductive dysfunctions,
    [ssquf] neurological disorders,
    [ssquf] heritable genetic mutations, or
    [ssquf] other chronic health effects.
     The chemical is known to cause or can be reasonably
anticipated to cause, because of:
    [cir] Its toxicity,
    [cir] its toxicity and persistence in the environment, or
    [cir] its toxicity and tendency to bioaccumulate in the
environment, a significant adverse effect on the environment of
sufficient seriousness, in the judgment of the Administrator, to
warrant reporting under this section.
    The EPA often refers to the section 313(d)(2)(A) criterion as the
``acute human health effects criterion;'' the section 313(d)(2)(B)
criterion as the ``chronic human health effects criterion;'' and the
section 313(d)(2)(C) criterion as the ``environmental effects
criterion.''
    The EPA published in the Federal Register of November 30, 1994 (59
FR 61432), a statement clarifying its interpretation of the section
313(d)(2) and (d)(3) criteria for modifying the section 313 list of
toxic chemicals.

III. Summary of Proposed Rule

A. What chemical did the EPA propose to add to the EPCRA section 313
list of toxic chemicals?

    As discussed in the proposed rule (80 FR 20189, April 15, 2015),
the EPA proposed to add 1-bromopropane to the EPCRA section 313 list of
toxic chemicals. 1-Bromopropane had been classified as ``reasonably
anticipated to be a human carcinogen'' by the National Toxicology
Program (NTP) in its 13th Report on Carcinogens (RoC) document. In
addition, based on a review of the available production and use
information, the EPA determined that 1-bromopropane is expected to be
manufactured, processed, or otherwise used in quantities that would
exceed the EPCRA section 313 reporting thresholds. The NTP is an
interagency program within the Department of Health and Human Services
(DHHS) headquartered at the National Institute of Environmental Health
Sciences (NIEHS) of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). As part of
the NTP's cancer evaluation work, it periodically publishes the RoC
document which contains cancer classifications from the NTP's most
recent chemical evaluations as well as the classifications from
previous versions of the RoC. There is an extensive review process for
the RoC which includes evaluations by scientists from the NTP, other
Federal health research and regulatory agencies (including the EPA),
and nongovernmental institutions. The RoC review process also includes
external peer review and several opportunities for public comment.

B. What was the EPA's rationale for proposing to list 1-bromopropane?

    As the EPA stated in the proposed rule (80 FR 20189, April 15,
2015), the NTP RoC document undergoes significant scientific review and
public comment and mirrors the review the EPA has historically done to
assess chemicals for listing under EPCRA section 313 on the basis of
carcinogenicity. The conclusions regarding the potential for chemicals
in the NTP RoC to cause cancer in humans are based on established sound
scientific principles. The EPA believes that the NTP RoC is an
excellent and reliable source of information on the potential for
chemicals covered therein to cause cancer in humans. Based on the EPA's
review of the data contained in the 13th NTP RoC (Reference (Ref.) 1)
for 1-bromopropane, the Agency agreed that 1-bromopropane can
reasonably be anticipated to cause cancer. Therefore, the EPA
determined that the evidence was sufficient for listing 1-bromopropane
on the EPCRA section 313 toxic chemical list pursuant to EPCRA section
313(d)(2)(B) based on the available carcinogenicity data for 1-
bromopropane as presented in the 13th RoC (Ref. 2).

IV. What comments did the EPA receive on the proposed rule?

    The EPA received four comments on the proposed rule to add 1-
bromopropane to the EPCRA section 313 chemical list. Three of the
comments were supportive of the EPA's proposed addition of 1-
bromopropane while one commenter objected to the addition. The
commenters that supported the proposed rule included two anonymous
comments from the general public (Refs. 3 and 4) and a comment from the
Halogenated Solvents Industry Alliance, Inc. (HSIA) (Ref. 5). Members
of the HSIA include The Dow Chemical Company, INEOS Chlor Americas,
Inc., Occidental Chemical, and Axiall Corporation. The commenter who
objected to the addition was the Albemarle Corporation (Ref. 6). The
most significant comments are summarized and responded to below. The
complete set of comments and the EPA's responses can be found in the
response to comment document in the docket for this rulemaking (Ref.
7). Note that in some of the comments 1-bromopropane is referred to as
nPB, which is the acronym for the alternative chemical name n-propyl
bromide.
    The HSIA (Ref. 5) stated that the proposed rule presented
substantial

evidence to support the conclusion that 1-bromopropane is known to
cause or can reasonably be anticipated to cause cancer in humans. The
HSIA also noted that other published studies indicate that 1-
bromopropane is neurotoxic, may cause reproductive dysfunction, and is
acutely or chronically toxic. The HSIA concluded that clearly, the
scientific literature supports the addition of 1-bromopropane to the
list of chemicals subject to reporting under EPCRA section 313.
    EPA agrees with the commenter's statement that the EPA provided
substantial evidence to support the conclusion that 1-bromopropane is
known to cause or can reasonably be anticipated to cause cancer in
humans. The EPA also agrees with the commenter's conclusion that the
scientific literature supports the addition of 1-bromopropane to the
EPCRA section 313 chemical list. The EPA acknowledges that there may be
other toxicological effects that may also be a basis for listing.
However, the EPA believes the available cancer data are sufficient for
adding 1-bromopropane to the EPCRA section 313 chemical list.
    The first anonymous commenter (Ref. 3) supported the addition of 1-
bromopropane to the EPCRA section 313 list and cited additional
toxicity information, neurotoxicity and reproductive toxicity, as being
of concern.
    EPA agrees that 1-bromopropane should be added to the EPCRA section
313 chemical list. The EPA also acknowledges that there may be other
toxicological effects (such as neurotoxicity) that may also be a basis
for listing. However, the available cancer data are sufficient for
adding 1-bromopropane to the EPCRA section 313 chemical list.
    The second anonymous commenter (Ref. 4) supported the listing of 1-
bromopropane as long as the benefits substantially outweigh the costs.
The commenter also expressed concern that there may be ``significant
costs to local businesses, i.e., laundry services, that have to update
or replace their equipment as well as significant costs and time spent
in order to comply with the rule.''
    EPA's cost-benefit analysis was contained in the economic analysis
for the proposed rule ``Economic Analysis of the Proposed Rule to add
1-Bromopropane to the EPCRA Section 313 List of Toxic Chemicals'' (Ref.
8), which was reference 8 in the proposed rule (80 FR 20189, April 15,
2015). The economic analysis contains a quantitative estimate of the
costs and a qualitative discussion of the benefits of the rule. The EPA
considers the benefits of reporting under this rule to be primarily
reflected by the purposes served by reporting of information under
EPCRA section 313. The EPA believes the benefits provided by the
information to be reported under this rule outweigh the costs.
    With regard to laundry services (such as dry cleaners) these
facilities are not subject to reporting under EPCRA section 313. Even
if such facilities were subject to reporting, listing a chemical under
EPCRA section 313 does not require covered facilities to update or
replace any equipment. EPCRA section 313 only requires the reporting of
release and waste management information, it does not impose any
restrictions on the use of chemicals.
    The majority of comments provided by the Albemarle Corporation
(Ref. 6) are the same comments they submitted in response to the
``Receipt of a complete petition'' to add 1-bromopropane to the
Hazardous Air Pollutant (HAP) List (80 FR 6676, February 6, 2015). The
only comments submitted by the Albemarle Corporation specific to the
EPA's proposed rule to add 1-bromopropane to the EPCRA section 313
chemical list were provided in a letter from Charles R. Nestrud of the
law firm Chisenhall, Nestrud & Julian, P.A. dated June 10, 2015
(Nestrud letter). The EPA is providing responses to all of the comments
in the Nestrud letter.
    The vast majority of the comments submitted by the Albemarle
Corporation on the HAP listing petition dealt with issues of emissions,
exposure, risk values, and risk assessment, which are not relevant to
the proposed addition of 1-bromopropane to the EPCRA section 313
chemical list since the addition is based on hazard and not risk. The
addition of 1-bromopropane to the EPCRA section 313 chemical list is
based on the cancer hazard evaluation carried out by the NTP and
reviewed by the EPA to ensure its consistency with the EPA Guidelines
for Carcinogen Risk Assessment (Ref. 9). Consistent with the EPA
guidelines (Ref. 9), the NTP 13th RoC (Ref. 2) evaluates the scientific
literature and publicly available, peer-reviewed technical reports of
human and laboratory studies to evaluate whether substances are
possible human carcinogens. The NTP RoC does not present a quantitative
assessment of the risks of cancer associated with a given chemical.
Rather, it indicates the potential hazard associated with chemicals but
does not establish the exposure conditions that would pose cancer risks
to individuals. In the 13th RoC, the NTP classified 1-bromopropane as
``reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen.'' The conclusions of
the NTP 13th RoC for 1-bromopropane were consistent with how the EPA
would consider the carcinogenicity data available for 1-bromopropane.
Therefore, for the purposes of listing 1-bromopropane on the EPCRA
section 313 chemical list, the EPA concluded that 1-bromopropane can
reasonably be anticipated to cause cancer in humans. Since the listing
of 1-bromopropane under EPCRA section 313 is based on the available
cancer data, the EPA is not responding to the comments from Albemarle
Corporation on the HAP listing petition that dealt with issues of
emissions, exposure, risk values, and risk assessment.
    While not specific to the materials the EPA cited to support the
addition of 1-bromopropane to the EPCRA section 313 chemical list,
there were some comments on the cancer data for 1-bromopropane in the
materials that the Albemarle Corporation submitted in response to the
HAP listing petition (Ref. 6). Specifically, these comments are
contained in sections 2.2 and 2.3 of the document ``Comments on the
Petition to Add n-Propyl Bromide to the List of Hazardous Air
Pollutants Regulated under Sec.  112 of the Clean Air Act'' prepared by
the Gradient Corporation (Gradient Corp.). Since these comments dealt
with the toxic endpoint (cancer) that is the basis for the addition of
1-bromopropane to the EPCRA section 313 chemical list, the EPA has
addressed these comments as well.
    In the Nestrud letter, the commenter stated that:

    The comments prepared by Albemarle and its consultants
demonstrate that the technical information submitted to support the
Proposed Rule is out of date, incorrect, and insufficient to support
the Proposed Rule. Furthermore, when all toxicological data is
considered, and current emission data is considered, the weight of
the evidence does not support adding 1-bromopropane to the list of
toxic chemicals.

    EPA disagrees that the information submitted to support the
proposed rule to add 1-bromopropane to the EPCRA section 313 chemical
list is ``out of date, incorrect, and insufficient to support the
Proposed Rule.'' The EPA provided information from the NTP 13th RoC
which was released on October 2, 2014 (Ref. 2). The EPA's evaluation of
the data used to support the findings for 1-bromopropane was conducted
shortly after the release of the 13th RoC and completed on November 3,
2014 (Ref. 1). The EPA's economic analysis of the potential costs of
the proposed rule

including the estimate of the number of facilities expected to file
reports was completed on February 17, 2015 (Ref. 8). The EPA notes that
the commenter did not provide any comments specific to the EPA's
evaluation of the NTP 13th RoC data and findings for 1-bromopropane
(Ref. 1), which was reference 6 in the proposed rule (80 FR 20189,
April 15, 2015), or specific to the NTP 13th RoC materials prepared for
1-bromopropane (Refs. 10 and 11), which were references 5 and 7 in the
proposed rule (80 FR 20189, April 15, 2015), or on the EPA's economic
analysis for the addition of 1-bromopropane (Ref. 8), which was
reference 8 in the proposed rule (80 FR 20189, April 15, 2015). It is,
therefore, unclear which technical information that the EPA submitted
to support the proposed rule that the commenter believes is out of
date, incorrect, or insufficient to support the proposed rule. Comments
regarding the available cancer data and relevance of emissions data are
discussed in other responses below.
    The Nestrud letter also provided comments concerning screening
criteria that the EPA had used in a previous rulemaking:

    In its 1994 rulemaking EPA identified certain criteria it had
developed to evaluate chemicals for additions to the list of toxic
chemicals. This included a toxicity and production volume screen,
and a hazard evaluation based on the initial screen. Addition of
Certain Chemicals; Toxic Chemical Release Reporting; Community
Right-to-Know; Final Rule (59 FR No. 229; Doc. No. 94-29376,
November 30, 1994; OPPTS-400082B.
    Toxicity Screen. Through the toxicity screen a chemical is
assigned a ``high priority,'' ``medium priority,'' or ``low
priority.'' The attached comments submitted to EPA as part of the
nPB Petition demonstrate that there is insufficient toxicity
information to support assigning a ``high priority,'' or ``medium
priority'' to nPB.

    The information that the commenter cited regarding the criteria the
EPA identified for evaluating chemicals for addition to the EPCRA
section 313 chemical list are the criteria the EPA used for its 1994
chemical expansion rulemaking to evaluate large numbers of chemicals
for potential addition. These screening criteria are not the criteria
used to determine whether or not a chemical can be added to the EPCRA
section 313 chemical list, that criteria is established under EPCRA
section 313(d)(2). As the EPA noted in the 1994 chemical expansion
rule:

    A toxicity screen is a limited review of readily available
toxicity data that is used for a preliminary categorization of a
chemical during the process of selecting candidates for possible
listing under EPCRA section 313. The toxicity screen is used to
identify chemicals for further consideration and does not reflect a
final determination for listing a chemical under EPCRA section 313.
Such a determination can only be made after a hazard assessment is
conducted (See Unit 11.3. of this preamble).

(59 FR 61433, November 30, 1994)

    EPA did not screen 1-bromopropane for addition, but rather
conducted a hazard evaluation of the available cancer data and based on
the classification by the NTP in their 13th RoC as ``reasonably
anticipated to be a human carcinogen'' and our review of that data,
concluded 1-bromopropane should be added to the EPCRA section 313
chemical list. As noted in the proposed rule, the EPA reviewed the data
used by the NTP to make this determination and agreed with the NTP's
classification (Ref. 1), which was reference 6 in the proposed rule (80
FR 20189, April 15, 2015). As the EPA noted in the 1994 chemical
expansion rule, cancer is an extreme toxic effect:

    In some cases the effects are extreme, such as cancer or death.

(59 FR 61433, November 30, 1994)

    If the EPA had conducted a toxicity screen like that used in the
1994 chemical expansion rule, the available cancer data would have been
sufficient to classify 1-bromopropane as a high priority for listing.
In fact, the NTP's 6th RoC was a primary source reviewed for chemicals
for potential addition (59 FR 1789, January 12, 1994). As previously
noted, the commenter did not provide any comments specifically on the
NTP's classification of 1-bromopropane as ``reasonably anticipated to
be a human carcinogen'' in the 13th RoC, nor did they provide any
comments on the EPA's evaluation of the NTP cancer data and
classification (Ref. 1), as provided in reference 6 of the proposed
rule (80 FR 20189, April 15, 2015).
    The Nestrud letter also commented on the issue of a production
volume screen:

    Production Volume Screen. When use of the chemical is less than
the reporting thresholds, the chemical is ``not considered
further.'' The attached comments submitted to EPA as part of the nPB
Petition demonstrate that there are no facilities in the dry
cleaning or spray adhesives industries that use more 1-bromopropane
than the reporting threshold of 10,000 pounds (5 tons). Although the
nPB Petition identified one facility in the metal cleaning industry
that used more 1-bromopropane than the reporting threshold of 10,000
pounds (5 tons), that facility reported its use of nPB pursuant to
its Title V Air Permit.

    Reference 8 in the proposed rule was the economic analysis for the
addition of 1-bromopropane to the EPCRA section 313 chemical list (Ref.
8). As indicated in the economic analysis, the EPA estimates that 140
reports (126 Form Rs and 14 Form As) from 23 different industry sectors
will be filed for 1-bromopropane. Therefore, the EPA has determined
that there is sufficient production and use of 1-bromopropane such that
reports will be filed. As previously noted, the commenter provided no
specific comments on the EPA's economic analysis. Certain spray
adhesives industries may be required to report under EPCRA section 313,
but dry cleaning facilities are not a covered industry sector and thus
are not required to file reports under EPCRA section 313. While it has
been the EPA's policy to focus on the addition of chemicals for which
reports are expected to be filed, it is not a statutory requirement. As
the EPA noted in the 2010 proposed rule for the addition of 16 NTP
carcinogens to the EPCRA section 313 chemical list:

    Section 313(d)(2) of EPCRA provides EPA the discretion to add
chemicals to the TRI list when there is sufficient evidence to
establish any of the listing criteria. EPA can add a chemical that
meets one criterion regardless of its production volume.

(75 FR 17336, April 6, 2010)

    The Nestrud letter also commented on the issue of conducting a
hazard evaluation to support the listing of 1-bromopropane to the EPCRA
section 313 list:

    Hazard Evaluation. Based on the results of the screen, EPA
should conduct a Hazard Evaluation for 1-bromopropane. The attached
comments submitted to EPA as part of the nPB Petition demonstrate
that the weight of the evidence is not sufficient to add 1-
bromopropane to the list of toxic chemicals. In particular, the
individual lifetime cancer risk at maximally impacted census
receptors near the facilities that use 1-bromopropane is less than 1
in 1 million for all the facilities identified by EPA in the nPB
Petition, with the exception of a narrow tube manufacturing
facility, for which the maximum individual lifetime cancer risk is
less than 1 in 100,000. Other than STC, there are no identified
populations that would have a lifetime cancer risks from exposure to
nPB in excess of 1 in 1 million.
    Accordingly, there is no information that would support adding
1-bromopropane to the list of toxic chemicals.

    The commenter states that the EPA should conduct a ``Hazard
Evaluation'' for 1-bromopropane, but that is exactly what the EPA did.
The EPA's hazard evaluation included the NTP's classification of 1-
bromopropane as ``reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen''
(Refs. 2 and 10) and the EPA's review of the data used by the NTP to
support that classification (Ref. 1). As noted in the proposed rule,
the NTP conducted an extensive review

(including public comment and peer review) of the cancer data for 1-
bromopropane in making the classification for the NTP 13th RoC. The
EPA's review of that information, as discussed in reference 6 of the
proposed rule, concluded that:

    The conclusions of the NTP RoC for 1-bromopropane were
consistent with how the Agency would consider the carcinogenicity
data available for 1-bromopropane. Therefore, it would be
appropriate for the Agency, for the purposes of listing 1-
bromopropane on the Toxics Release Inventory, to conclude that 1-
bromopropane can reasonably be anticipated to cause cancer in
humans.

(80 FR 20189, April 15, 2015)

    EPA believes the cancer data for 1-bromopropane sufficiently
support listing under EPCRA section 313(d)(2)(B). None of the
information concerning the cancer data that the commenter submitted in
their response to the petition to add 1-bromopropane to the hazardous
air pollutant (HAP) list changes the EPA's conclusion with regard to
the potential for 1-bromopropane to cause cancer in humans. Responses
to the specific comments on certain portions of the hazard evaluation
are addressed in other responses.
    With regard to the commenter's conclusions concerning the cancer
risks from facilities identified in the HAP petition, this information
is not relevant to the addition of 1-bromopropane to the EPCRA section
313 chemical list. The EPA did not base the proposed addition of 1-
bromopropane to the EPCRA section 313 chemical list on any exposure or
risk evaluation. 1-Bromopropane meets the EPCRA section 313(d)(2)(B)
listing criteria based on the cancer data alone and there are no
statutory requirements to consider exposure or risk under EPCRA section
313(d)(2)(B). While the statutory criteria of EPCRA section
313(d)(2)(B) do not require consideration of exposure or risk, the EPA
has a policy concerning when it may be appropriate to consider
potential exposures when adding chemicals under EPCRA section
313(d)(2)(B). As the EPA stated in the proposed rule:

    EPA considers chemicals that can reasonably be anticipated to
cause cancer to have moderately high to high chronic toxicity. EPA
does not believe that it is appropriate to consider exposure for
chemicals that are moderately high to highly toxic based on a hazard
assessment when determining if a chemical can be added for chronic
effects pursuant to EPCRA section 313(d)(2)(B) (see 59 FR 61440-
61442). Therefore, in accordance with EPA's standard policy on the
use of exposure assessments (59 FR 61432), EPA does not believe that
an exposure assessment is necessary or appropriate for determining
whether 1-bromopropane meets the criteria of EPCRA section
313(d)(2)(B).

(80 FR 20189, April 15, 2015)

    The EPA disagrees with the conclusion of the commenter that there
is no information that would support adding 1-bromopropane to the EPCRA
section 313 chemical list. In fact, it is the EPA's position that there
are extensive cancer data that support this addition as discussed and
referenced in the proposed rule.
    In the comments the Albemarle Corporation submitted on the HAP
listing petition (Ref. 6), the report by Gradient Corp. included
section ``2.2 Human Relevance of the Petitioner's Inhalation Unit Risk
Factor.'' In that section, issues regarding the cancer data for 1-
bromopropane were raised. These issues include the petitioners' use of
alveolar/bronchiolar adenomas and carcinomas in B6C3F1 mice for their
risk assessment. The commenter took issue with the petitioners'
suggestion that ``there are no reasons to assume that the mode, or
modes, of action by which tumors are induced by nPB are not relevant to
man.'' The commenter stated that the petitioners' supporting
information lacked an analysis of the human relevance of the mouse lung
tumors or any other cancer endpoint and cited recommendations in the
EPA's Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment for collecting relevant
information on the mode of action. The commenter stated that alveolar/
bronchiolar adenomas and carcinomas have been reviewed and debated for
a number of chemical compounds and were the subject of a 2014 technical
workshop sponsored by the EPA. The commenter also provided summaries of
relevant information that they claim are available for 1-bromopropane
to explore mode of action questions. The commenter concluded that there
is evidence that the mode of action for the endpoint selected to
predict risks for 1-bromopropane may not be relevant for humans. The
commenter stated that, considering the state-of-the-science surrounding
this health endpoint, the EPA should not rely on the data for alveolar/
bronchiolar adenomas and carcinomas in B6C3F1 mice for characterizing
cancer risks in humans from exposure to 1-bromopropane.
    As the EPA previously noted, the proposed addition of 1-
bromopropane to the EPCRA section 313 chemical list is based on hazard
alone and not on any consideration of exposures or potential risks. For
the purposes of listing under EPCRA section 313(d)(2)(B), the EPA is
not relying on the data for alveolar/bronchiolar adenomas and
carcinomas in B6C3F1 mice for characterizing cancer risks in humans
from exposure to 1-bromopropane. While the EPA convened a technical
workshop on the state-of-the-science for chemically-induced mouse lung
tumors, there was no consensus on the relevance of this tumor to humans
(Ref. 12). Rather, one of the workshop outcomes included the future
application of the information discussed during the workshop to develop
a mode of action framework on a chemical by chemical basis. As stated
in the EPA Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment (Ref. 9):

    The default option is that positive effects in animal cancer
studies indicate that the agent under study can have carcinogenic
potential in humans. Thus, if no adequate human or mode of action
data are present, positive effects in animal cancer studies are a
basis for assessing the carcinogenic hazard to humans.

    The NTP monograph for 1-bromopropane (Ref. 10) discussed the issue
of mode of action in the section on mechanistic considerations:

5.3 Mechanistic considerations

    The biological events associated with chemically induced cancer
are not completely understood even for chemicals that have been
extensively studied and are known to cause cancer in humans (e.g.,
benzene and arsenic) (Guyton et al. 2009). It is important to
recognize that chemicals can act through multiple toxicity pathways
and mechanisms to induce cancer or other health effects, and the
relative importance of the various pathways may vary with life
stage, genetic background, and dose. Thus, it is unlikely that for
any chemical a single mechanism or mode of action will fully explain
the multiple biological alterations and toxicity pathways that can
cause normal cells to transform and ultimately form a tumor.
    Although no studies were identified that were specifically
designed to investigate possible modes of action for 1-bromopropane-
induced carcinogenesis, the available data indicate that metabolic
activation, genetic damage, and oxidative stress from glutathione
depletion are important factors. As discussed in the previous
section, these factors were linked to several of the primary non-
neoplastic toxic effects of 1-bromopropane, including
immunosuppression, neurotoxicity, reproductive toxicity, and
hepatotoxicity. Other factors that have been associated with
carcinogenesis and may be relevant for 1-bromopropane are discussed
and include immune-response modulation, altered cell signaling and
gene expression, inflammation, and cytotoxicity and compensatory
cell proliferation.

(Ref. 10, page 40)

    After considering the mode of action issues, the NTP classified 1-

bromopropane as ``reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen.''
The EPA believes that this classification is consistent with how the
data would be evaluated under the EPA's Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk
Assessment (Ref. 9).
    In the comments the Albemarle Corporation submitted on the HAP
listing petition, the report by Gradient Corp. included section ``2.3
Human Relevance of NTP Results.'' In that section, issues regarding the
cancer data for 1-bromopropane were raised. The commenter stated that
the petitioners cited NTP results for the mouse and rat bioassays as
evidence of the potential carcinogenic activity of 1-bromopropane (Ref.
13). The commenter claims that the petitioner did not consider
potential uncertainties that the commenter believes are found in the
underlying mutagenicity, genotoxicity, and carcinogenicity data for 1-
bromopropane. The commenter claimed that this was not consistent with
the EPA's cancer guidelines, which recommend evaluating the weight of
evidence prior to determining the carcinogenic potential of a chemical
substance. The commenter went on to summarize information from studies
they believe show potential uncertainties that are apparent in the
toxicological information for 1-bromopropane.
    Since the publication of the NTP bioassay cited by the commenter
(Ref. 13), the NTP published its 13th RoC (Ref. 2). In this report, the
NTP concluded that there is sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity for
1-bromopropane based on (1) skin tumors in male rats, (2) tumors of the
large intestine in female and male rats, and (3) lung tumors in female
mice. The report also cited malignant mesothelioma of the abdominal
cavity and pancreatic islet tumors in male rats and skin tumors
(squamous-cell papilloma, keratoacanthoma, and basal-cell adenoma or
carcinoma) in female rats as supporting evidence. The NTP's monograph
for 1-bromopropane addresses all of the data issues that the commenter
raised (Ref. 10).
    According to the EPA's Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment
(Ref. 9), an agent can be classified as ``Likely to Be Carcinogenic to
Humans'' if it ``has tested positive in animal experiments in more than
one species, sex, strain, site, or exposure route, with or without
evidence of carcinogenicity in humans.'' Inconsistencies between how
the data were interpreted by the NTP and how that same data might be
interpreted under the EPA's Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment
(Ref. 9) were not identified (see reference 6 in the proposed rule).
The EPA Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment reference the NTP
criteria for assessing individual studies in the assessment of
carcinogenicity, stating ``(c)riteria for the technical adequacy of
animal carcinogenicity studies have been published and should be used
as guidance to judge the acceptability of individual studies, e.g.,
NTP, 1984 . . .'' (pages 2-16).
    While the EPA acknowledges that uncertainties exist when evaluating
any agent, the EPA agrees with NTP's assessment of the data and
conclusions regarding the carcinogenicity of 1-bromopropane. Indeed,
according to the EPA's Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment (Ref.
9) ``The default option is that positive effects in animal cancer
studies indicate that the agent under study can have carcinogenic
potential in humans. Thus, if no adequate human or mode of action data
are present, positive effects in animal cancer studies are a basis for
assessing the carcinogenic hazard to humans.'' The EPA believes that
the evaluation of the available data are consistent with the EPA's
guidelines including the EPA's ``Supplemental guidance for assessing
susceptibility from early-life exposure to carcinogens (Final)'' (Ref.
14).
    The NTP in its monograph of 1-bromopropane (Ref. 10), which
supported the 13th RoC listing (Ref. 2), concluded the following:

    Studies in vivo show that 1-bromopropane can covalently bind to
protein in exposed rats and occupationally exposed workers. The
available data provide some support that 1-bromopropane is genotoxic
as it induced mutations in bacterial and mammalian cells and DNA
damage in human cells. There is limited evidence that DNA damage was
induced in leukocytes from 1-bromopropane-exposed workers. 1-
Bromopropane did not induce chromosomal damage in exposed rodents
(micronucleus induction assay) or gene-cell mutations (dominant
lethal mutation assay). Several known or postulated metabolites of
1-bromopropane have been identified as mutagens and two, glycidol
and propylene oxide (proposed), were shown to cause chromosomal and
DNA damage in cultured mammalian cells. Both metabolites caused
chromosomal damage in cells from rodents exposed in vivo, and
propylene oxide induced DNA damage in cells from exposed workers.
Three other 1-bromopropane metabolites ([alpha]-bromohydrin, 3-
bromo-1-propanol, and 1-bromo-2-propanol) were mutagenic or caused
DNA damage in bacteria.

    The EPA agrees with the NTP's conclusions regarding the
mutagenicity of 1-bromopropane and its metabolites. With the exception
of the summary information provided by the commenter for one
unpublished study, all of the studies cited by the commenter in their
assessment of the mutagenicity data for 1-bromopropane were cited by
the NTP in their monograph for 1-bromopropane (Ref. 10). Also, the
commenter focused on the mutagenicity data for 1-bromopropane, but the
data on the mutagenicity of the metabolites of 1-bromopropane are an
important part of the assessment as well. The summarized results of the
unpublished study provided by the commenter do not change the
conclusion regarding the mutagenicity of 1-bromopropane and its
metabolites.

V. Summary of Final Rule

    The EPA is finalizing the addition of 1-bromopropane to the EPCRA
section 313 list of toxic chemicals. The EPA has determined that 1-
bromopropane meets the listing criteria under EPCRA section
313(d)(2)(B) based on the available carcinogenicity data.

VI. References

    The EPA has established an official public docket for this action
under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-TRI-2015-0011. The public docket includes
information considered by the EPA in developing this action, including
the documents listed below, which are electronically or physically
located in the docket. In addition, interested parties should consult
documents that are referenced in the documents that the EPA has placed
in the docket, regardless of whether these referenced documents are
electronically or physically located in the docket. For assistance in
locating documents that are referenced in documents that the EPA has
placed in the docket, but that are not electronically or physically
located in the docket, please consult the person listed in the above
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For convenience, the docket
also includes all of the Federal Register documents cited in this
action.

1. USEPA, OEI, 2014. Memorandum from Jocelyn Hospital, Toxicologist,
Analytical Support Branch to Sandra Gaona, Acting Chief, Analytical
Support Branch. November 3, 2014. Subject: Review of National
Toxicology Program (NTP) Cancer Classification Data for 1-
bromopropane.
2. NTP, 2014. National Toxicology Program. Report on Carcinogens,
Thirteenth Edition. Released October 2, 2014. U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National
Toxicology Program, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709. (http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/pubhealth/roc/roc13/index.html).
3. Anonymous public comment. April 15, 2015. EPA-HQ-TRI-2015-0011-
0048.

4. Anonymous public comment. April 16, 2015. EPA-HQ-TRI-2015-0011-
0049.
5. Comment submitted by Faye Graul, Executive Director, Halogenated
Solvents Industry Alliance Incorporated (HSIA). Re: Docket ID No.
EPA-HQ-TRI-2015-0011. June 15, 2015. EPA-HQ-TRI-2015-0011-0051.
6. Comment submitted by Niomi Krzystowczyk, Vice President, Health,
Safety and Environment, Albemarle Corporation. Re: Proposed Rule:
Addition of 1-Bromopropane; Community Right-to-Know Toxic Chemical
Release Reporting; Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-TRI-2015-0011 [FRL-9925-29-
OEI, 80 FR 20189 (April 15, 2015). June 10, 2015. EPA-HQ-TRI-2015-
0011-0050.
7. USEPA, OEI, 2015. Response to Comments Received on the April 15,
2015, Federal Register Proposed Rule (80 FR 20189): Addition of 1-
Bromopropane; Community Right-to-Know Toxic Chemical Release
Reporting. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of
Environmental Information, Office of Information Analysis and
Access. August 20, 2015.
8. USEPA, OEI, 2015. Economic Analysis of the Proposed Rule to add
1-Bromopropane to the EPCRA Section 313 List of Toxic Chemicals.
February 17, 2015.
9. USEPA, 2005. Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment. Risk
Assessment Forum, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington,
DC, March 2005. EPA/630/P-03/001F.
10. NTP, 2013. Report on Carcinogens Monograph on 1-Bromopropane.
Office of the Report on Carcinogens, Division of the National
Toxicology Program, National Institute of Environmental Health
Sciences, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. NIH
Publication No. 13-5982, September 25, 2013.
11. NTP, 2014. National Toxicology Program. Report on Carcinogens,
Thirteenth Edition, Profile for 1-Bromopropane. Released October 2,
2014. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health
Service, National Toxicology Program, Research Triangle Park, NC
27709.
12. USEPA, 2014. Summary Report of the State-of-the-Science Workshop
on Chemically-induced Mouse Lung Tumors: Applications to Human
Health Assessments. National Center for Environmental Assessment,
Washington, DC, December 2014. EPA/600/R-14/002.
13. NTP, 2011. Technical Report on the Toxicology and Carcinogenesis
Studies of 1-Bromopropane (CAS No. 106-94-5) in F344/N Rats and
B6C3F1 Mice (Inhalation Studies). Toxicity Report Series No. 564.
NIH Publication No. 11-5906. Department of Health and Human
Services, Public Health Service, Research Triangle Park, NC.
14. USEPA, 2005. Supplemental guidance for assessing susceptibility
from early-life exposure to carcinogens (Final). Risk Assessment
Forum, Washington, DC, March 2005. EPA/630/R-03/003F.

VII. What are the statutory and Executive Order reviews associated with
this action?

    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 and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is not a significant regulatory action and was
therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not contain any new information collection
requirements that require additional approval by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA).
OMB has previously approved the information collection activities
contained in the existing regulations and has assigned OMB control
numbers 2025-0009 and 2050-0078. Currently, the facilities subject to
the reporting requirements under EPCRA 313 and PPA 6607 may use either
the EPA Toxic Chemicals Release Inventory Form R (EPA Form 1B9350-1),
or the EPA Toxic Chemicals Release Inventory Form A (EPA Form 1B9350-
2). The Form R must be completed if a facility manufactures, processes,
or otherwise uses any listed chemical above threshold quantities and
meets certain other criteria. For the Form A, the EPA established an
alternative threshold for facilities with low annual reportable amounts
of a listed toxic chemical. A facility that meets the appropriate
reporting thresholds, but estimates that the total annual reportable
amount of the chemical does not exceed 500 pounds per year, can take
advantage of an alternative manufacture, process, or otherwise use
threshold of 1 million pounds per year of the chemical, provided that
certain conditions are met, and submit the Form A instead of the Form
R. In addition, respondents may designate the specific chemical
identity of a substance as a trade secret pursuant to EPCRA section
322, 42 U.S.C. 11042, 40 CFR part 350.
    OMB has approved the reporting and recordkeeping requirements
related to Forms A and R, supplier notification, and petitions under
OMB Control number 2025-0009 (EPA Information Collection Request (ICR)
No. 1363) and those related to trade secret designations under OMB
Control 2050-0078 (EPA ICR No. 1428). As provided in 5 CFR 1320.5(b)
and 1320.6(a), 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
relevant to the EPA's regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9, 48 CFR
chapter 15, and displayed on the information collection instruments
(e.g., forms, instructions).

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as Amended by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. The
small entities subject to the requirements of this action are small
manufacturing facilities. The Agency has determined that of the 140
entities estimated to be impacted by this action, 136 are small
businesses; no small governments or small organizations are expected to
be affected by this action. All 136 small businesses affected by this
action are estimated to incur annualized cost impacts of less than 1%.
Facilities eligible to use Form A (those meeting the appropriate
activity threshold which have 500 pounds per year or less of reportable
amounts of the chemical) will have a lower burden. Thus, this action is
not expected to have a significant adverse economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. A more detailed analysis of the
impacts on small entities is located in the EPA's economic analysis
support document (Ref. 8).

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This action does not contain an unfunded 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. This action is not
subject to the requirements of UMRA because it contains no regulatory
requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. Small governments are not subject to the EPCRA section 313
reporting requirements. The EPA's economic analysis indicates that the
total cost of this action is estimated to be $531,002 in the first year
of reporting (Ref. 8).

E. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    This action does not have federalism implications. 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.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175. This action relates to toxic chemical reporting
under EPCRA section 313, which primarily affects private sector
facilities. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 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, because it is
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    The EPA believes the human health or environmental risk addressed
by this action will not have potential disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income
or indigenous populations. The results of this evaluation are contained
below.
    This action does not address any human health or environmental
risks and does not affect the level of protection provided to human
health or the environment. This action adds an additional chemical to
the EPCRA section 313 reporting requirements. By adding a chemical to
the list of toxic chemicals subject to reporting under section 313 of
EPCRA, the EPA would be providing communities across the United States
(including minority populations and low income populations) with access
to data which they may use to seek lower exposures and consequently
reductions in chemical risks for themselves and their children. This
information can also be used by government agencies and others to
identify potential problems, set priorities, and take appropriate steps
to reduce any potential risks to human health and the environment.
Therefore, the informational benefits of the action will have a
positive impact on the human health and environmental impacts of
minority populations, low-income populations, and children.

K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

    This action is subject to the CRA, and the EPA will submit a rule
report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of
the United States. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 372

    Environmental protection, Community right-to-know, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, and Toxic chemicals.

    Dated: November 9, 2015.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the EPA amends 40 CFR
part 372 as follows:

PART 372--TOXIC CHEMICAL RELEASE REPORTING: COMMUNITY RIGHT-TO-KNOW

0
1. The authority citation for part 372 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 11023 and 11048.

0
2. In Sec.  372.65, paragraph (a) is amended by adding in the table the
entry for ``1-Bromopropane'' in alphabetical order and in paragraph (b)
by adding in the table the entry for ``106-94-5'' in numerical order to
read as follows:

Sec.  372.65  Chemicals and chemical categories to which this part
applies.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Chemical name                  CAS No.       Effective date
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              * * * * * * *
1-Bromopropane........................        106-94-5           1/1/16

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

* * * * *
    (b) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
            CAS No.                   Chemical name       Effective date
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              * * * * * * *
106-94-5.......................  1-Bromopropane........          1/1/16

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

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2015-29799 Filed 11-20-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: June 15, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 114)]
[Notices]
[Page 33857-33861]
[DOCID:fr15jn10-122]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 29295; 812-13539]

DWS Advisor Funds, et al.; Notice of Application

June 9, 2010.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').

ACTION: Notice of an application for an order under section 12(d)(1)(J)
of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the ``Act'') for an exemption
from sections 12(d)(1)(A) and (B) of the Act, and under sections 6(c)
and 17(b) of the Act for an exemption from section 17(a) of the Act.

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

Summary of the Application: Applicants request an order that would
permit certain registered open-end management investment companies to
acquire shares of other registered open-end management investment
companies and unit investment trusts that are within and outside the
same group of investment companies.

Applicants: (a) DWS Advisor Funds, DWS Blue Chip Fund, DWS
Communications Fund, Inc., DWS Equity Trust, DWS Global/International
Fund, Inc., DWS High Income Series, DWS Income Trust, DWS Institutional
Funds, DWS International Fund, Inc., DWS Investment Trust, DWS
Investments VIT Funds, DWS Money Funds, DWS Money Market Trust, DWS
Mutual Funds, Inc., DWS Portfolio Trust, DWS Securities Trust, DWS
Strategic Income Fund, DWS Target Fund, DWS Target Date Series, DWS
Technology Fund, DWS Value Equity Trust, DWS Value Series, Inc., DWS
Variable Series I, and DWS Variable Series II (each, a ``DWS Investment
Company'' and collectively, the ``DWS Investment Companies''); and (b)
Deutsche Investment Management Americas Inc. (``DIMA'' or the
``Adviser'').

Filing Dates: The application was filed on May 28, 2008, and amended on
January 9, 2009, and May 11, 2010. Applicants have agreed to file an
amendment during the notice period, the substance of which is reflected
in this notice.

Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An order granting the application
will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing. Interested
persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's Secretary
and serving applicants with a copy of the request, personally or by
mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by 5:30
p.m. on July 6, 2010, and should be accompanied by proof of service on
applicants, in the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a certificate
of service. Hearing requests should state the nature of the writer's
interest, the reason for the request, and the issues contested. Persons
who wish to be notified of a hearing may request notification by
writing to the Commission's Secretary.

ADDRESSES: Secretary, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. Applicants, 345 Park Avenue,
New York, NY 10154.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christine Y. Greenlees, Senior
Counsel, at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or Mary Kay Frech, Branch Chief, at (202)
551-6821 (Division of Investment Management, Office of Investment
Company Regulation).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is a summary of the
application. The complete application may be obtained via the
Commission's Web site by searching for the file number, or an applicant
using the Company name box, at http://www.sec.gov/search/search.htm or
by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Applicants' Representations

    1. Each DWS Investment Company is organized as a Massachusetts
business trust or a Maryland corporation and is registered as an open-
end management investment company under the Act.\1\ Each DWS Investment
Company is comprised of separate DWS Funds that pursue distinct
investment objectives and strategies. The series of DWS Variable Series
I, DWS Variable Series II and DWS Investments VIT Funds are offered to
registered separate accounts (``Registered Separate Accounts'') and
unregistered separate accounts (``Unregistered Separate Accounts,''
collectively with Registered Separate Accounts, ``Separate Accounts'')
of affiliated and unaffiliated insurance companies (collectively,
``Insurance Companies'') as the underlying investment vehicles for the
variable life insurance and variable annuity contracts (``Variable
Contracts'') issued by the Insurance Companies. Shares of the above
funds may be offered to qualified pension and retirement plans. The
Adviser, an investment adviser registered under the Investment Advisers
Act of 1940 (``Advisers Act''), is the investment adviser for each DWS
Fund and will serve as investment adviser to each DWS Fund of Funds (as
defined below).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Applicants request that the order also extend to existing
and future series of the DWS Investment Companies, and any existing
or future registered open-end management investment companies and
any series thereof that are part of the same ``group of investment
companies,'' as defined in section 12(d)(1)(G)(ii) of the Act, as
the DWS Investment Companies and that are, or may in the future be,
advised by DIMA (together with series of the DWS Investment
Companies, the ``DWS Funds''). All entities that currently intend to
rely on the requested order are named as applicants, and any other
entity that relies on the order in the future will comply with the
terms and conditions of the application.
    \2\ The term ``DIMA'' or ``Adviser'' includes any existing or
future entity controlling, controlled by or under common control
with Deutsche Investment Management Americas Inc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. Applicants request relief to permit certain DWS Funds (each such
DWS Fund, a ``DWS Fund of Funds'') to invest in: (a) Other DWS Funds
(``Affiliated Underlying Funds''), and (b) registered open-end
management investment companies (``Unaffiliated Funds'') and registered
unit investment trusts (``Unaffiliated Trusts,'' and together with
Unaffiliated Funds, ``Unaffiliated Underlying Funds'') that are not
part of the same ``group of investment companies'' (as defined in
section 12(d)(1)(G)(ii) of the Act) as the DWS Funds (Unaffiliated
Underlying Funds and Affiliated Underlying Funds are collectively
referred to as the ``Underlying Funds''). The relief also would permit
the Underlying Funds, their principal underwriters and any broker or
dealer registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Broker'') to sell shares of the Underlying Funds to the DWS Fund of
Funds. Each DWS Fund of Funds may invest in Unaffiliated Underlying
Funds that have received exemptive relief to list and trade their
shares on a national securities exchange at negotiated prices
(``ETFs''). Applicants state that the DWS Funds of Funds will offer
investors a range of investment objectives generally designed to either
provide diversified exposure to specific asset classes or meet long-
term objectives.

Applicants' Legal Analysis

A. Section 12(d)(1)

    1. Section 12(d)(1)(A) of the Act, in relevant part, prohibits a
registered investment company from acquiring

shares of an investment company if the securities represent more than
3% of the total outstanding voting stock of the acquired company, more
than 5% of the total assets of the acquiring company, or, together with
the securities of any other investment companies, more than 10% of the
total assets of the acquiring company. Section 12(d)(1)(B) of the Act
prohibits a registered open-end investment company, its principal
underwriter, and any broker or dealer from selling the investment
company's shares to another investment company if the sale will cause
the acquiring company to own more than 3% of the acquired company's
voting stock, or if the sale will cause more than 10% of the acquired
company's voting stock to be owned by investment companies generally.
    2. Section 12(d)(1)(J) of the Act provides that the Commission may
exempt any person, security, or transaction, or any class or classes of
persons, securities or transactions, from any provision of section
12(d)(1) if the exemption is consistent with the public interest and
the protection of investors. Applicants seek an exemption under section
12(d)(1)(J) of the Act to permit the DWS Fund of Funds to acquire
shares of the Underlying Funds in excess of the limits in section
12(d)(1)(A), and the Underlying Funds, their principal underwriters and
any Broker to sell shares of the Underlying Funds to the DWS Fund of
Funds in excess of the limits in section 12(d)(1)(B) of the Act.
    3. Applicants state that the proposed arrangement will not give
rise to the policy concerns underlying sections 12(d)(1)(A) and (B),
which include concerns about undue influence by a fund of funds over
underlying funds, excessive layering of fees, and overly complex fund
structures. Accordingly, applicants believe that the requested
exemption is consistent with the public interest and the protection of
investors.
    4. Applicants believe that neither a DWS Fund of Funds nor its
affiliate would be able to exert undue influence over the Unaffiliated
Underlying Funds. The concern about undue influence does not arise in
connection with a DWS Fund of Funds investing in Affiliated Underlying
Funds since they are part of the same group of investment companies. To
limit the control that a DWS Fund of Funds or its affiliate may have
over an Unaffiliated Underlying Fund, applicants propose a condition
prohibiting the Adviser, any person controlling, controlled by, or
under common control with the Adviser, any investment company and any
issuer that would be an investment company but for section 3(c)(1) or
3(c)(7) of the Act that is advised or sponsored by the Adviser or any
person controlling, controlled by, or under common control with the
Adviser (the ``Group'') from controlling (individually or in the
aggregate) an Unaffiliated Underlying Fund within the meaning of
section 2(a)(9) of the Act. The same prohibition would apply to any
other investment adviser within the meaning of section 2(a)(20)(B) of
the Act to a DWS Fund of Funds (``Subadviser''), any person
controlling, controlled by or under common control with the Subadviser,
any investment company and any issuer that would be an investment
company but for section 3(c)(1) or 3(c)(7) of the Act (or portion of
such investment company or issuer) advised or sponsored by the
Subadviser or any person controlling, controlled by or under common
control with the Subadviser (the ``Subadviser Group''). Applicants
propose other conditions to limit the potential for undue influence
over the Unaffiliated Underlying Funds, including that no DWS Fund of
Funds or DWS Fund of Funds Affiliate \3\ (except to the extent it is
acting in its capacity as an investment adviser to an Unaffiliated Fund
or sponsor to an Unaffiliated Trust) will cause an Unaffiliated
Underlying Fund to purchase a security in an offering of securities
during the existence of an underwriting or selling syndicate of which a
principal underwriter is an Underwriting Affiliate (``Affiliated
Underwriting''). An ``Underwriting Affiliate'' is a principal
underwriter in any underwriting or selling syndicate that is an
officer, director, advisory board member, Adviser, Subadviser, or
employee of a DWS Fund of Funds, or a person of which any such officer,
director, Adviser, Subadviser, member of an advisory board, or employee
is an affiliated person. An Underwriting Affiliate does not include any
person whose relationship to an Unaffiliated Underlying Fund is covered
by section 10(f) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ A ``DWS Fund of Funds Affiliate'' is a DWS Fund of Funds
Adviser, DWS Fund of Funds Subadviser, promoter and principal
underwriter of a DWS Fund of Funds and any person controlling,
controlled by, or under common control with any of those entities.
An ``Unaffiliated Underlying Fund Affiliate'' is an investment
adviser(s), sponsor, promoter and principal underwriter of an
Unaffiliated Underlying Fund and any person controlling, controlled
by, or under common control with any of those entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. To further ensure that an Unaffiliated Fund understands the
implications of a DWS Fund of Funds' investment under the requested
relief, prior to an investment in the shares of the Unaffiliated Fund
in excess of the limit in section 12(d)(1)(A)(i), a DWS Fund of Funds
and the Unaffiliated Fund will execute an agreement stating, without
limitation, that their boards of directors or trustees and their
investment advisers understand the terms and conditions of the order
and agree to fulfill their responsibilities under the order
(``Participation Agreement''). Applicants note that an Unaffiliated
Underlying Fund (other than an ETF whose shares are purchased by a DWS
Fund of Funds in the secondary market) will retain the right to reject
any investment by a DWS Fund of Funds.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ An Unaffiliated Fund, including an ETF, would retain its
right to reject an initial investment by a DWS Fund of Funds in
excess of the limit in section 12(d)(1)(A)(i) of the Act by
declining to execute the Participation Agreement with the DWS Fund
of Funds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. Applicants do not believe that the proposed arrangement will
involve excessive layering of fees. The board of directors or trustees
(``Board'') of each DWS Fund of Funds, including a majority of the
directors or trustees who are not ``interested persons'' (within the
meaning of section 2(a)(19) of the Act) (``Disinterested Trustees''),
will find that the advisory fees charged under the advisory contract
are based on services provided that will be in addition to, rather than
duplicative of, the services provided under the advisory contracts of
any Underlying Funds in which a DWS Fund of Funds may invest. In
addition, the Adviser will waive fees otherwise payable to it by the
DWS Fund of Funds in an amount at least equal to any compensation
(including fees received pursuant to a plan adopted by an Unaffiliated
Fund under rule 12b-1 under the Act) received from an Unaffiliated
Underlying Fund by the Adviser or an affiliated person of the Adviser,
other than any advisory fees paid to the Adviser or an affiliated
person of the Adviser by an Unaffiliated Fund, in connection with the
investment by the DWS Fund of Funds in the Unaffiliated Underlying
Fund.
    7. Applicants state that with respect to Registered Separate
Accounts that invest in a DWS Fund of Funds, no sales load will be
charged at the DWS Fund of Funds level or at the Underlying Fund level.
Other sales charges and service fees, as defined in Rule 2830 of the
Conduct Rules of the NASD (``NASD Conduct Rule 2830''), will only be
charged at the DWS Fund of Funds level or at the Underlying Fund level,
not both. With respect to other investments in a DWS Fund of Funds, any
sales charges and/or service fees charged with respect to shares of the
DWS Fund of Funds will not exceed the limits

applicable to a fund of funds as set forth in NASD Conduct Rule
2830.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Any references to NASD Conduct Rule 2830 include any
successor or replacement rule to NASD Conduct Rule 2830 that may be
adopted by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    8. Applicants represent that each DWS Fund of Funds will represent
in the Participation Agreement that no Insurance Company sponsoring a
Registered Separate Account funding variable insurance contracts will
be permitted to invest in the DWS Fund of Funds unless the Insurance
Company has certified to the DWS Fund of Funds that the aggregate of
all fees and charges associated with each contract that invests in the
DWS Fund of Funds, including fees and charges at the Separate Account,
DWS Fund of Funds, and Underlying Fund levels, are reasonable in
relation to the services rendered, the expenses expected to be
incurred, and the risks assumed by the Insurance Company.
    9. Applicants submit that the proposed arrangement will not create
an overly complex fund structure. Applicants note that no Underlying
Fund will acquire securities of any investment company or company
relying on section 3(c)(1) or 3(c)(7) of the Act in excess of the
limits contained in section 12(d)(1)(A) of the Act, except in certain
circumstances identified in condition 11 below.

B. Section 17(a)

    1. Section 17(a) of the Act generally prohibits sales or purchases
of securities between a registered investment company and its
affiliated persons or affiliated persons of such persons. Section
2(a)(3) of the Act defines an ``affiliated person'' of another person
to include (a) any person directly or indirectly owning, controlling,
or holding with power to vote, 5% or more of the outstanding voting
securities of the other person; (b) any person 5% or more of whose
outstanding voting securities are directly or indirectly owned,
controlled, or held with power to vote by the other person; and (c) any
person directly or indirectly controlling, controlled by, or under
common control with the other person.
    2. Applicants state that the DWS Funds of Funds and the Affiliated
Underlying Funds may be deemed to be under common control and therefore
affiliated persons of one another. Applicants also state that the DWS
Funds of Funds and an Underlying Fund may be deemed to be affiliated
persons of one another if a DWS Fund of Funds acquires 5% or more of an
Underlying Fund's outstanding voting securities. In light of these and
other possible affiliations, section 17(a) could prevent an Underlying
Fund from selling shares to and redeeming shares from a DWS Fund of
Funds.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Applicants acknowledge that receipt of compensation by (a)
an affiliated person of a DWS Fund of Funds, or an affiliated person
of such person, for the purchase by the DWS Fund of Funds of shares
of an Underlying Fund or (b) an affiliated person of an Underlying
Fund, or an affiliated person of such person, for the sale by the
Underlying Fund of its shares to a DWS Fund of Funds may be
prohibited by section 17(e)(1) of the Act. The Participation
Agreement also will include this acknowledgment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. Section 17(b) of the Act authorizes the Commission to grant an
order permitting a transaction otherwise prohibited by section 17(a) if
it finds that (i) the terms of the proposed transaction are fair and
reasonable and do not involve overreaching on the part of any person
concerned; (ii) the proposed transaction is consistent with the
policies of each registered investment company involved; and (iii) the
proposed transaction is consistent with the general purposes of the
Act. Section 6(c) of the Act permits the Commission to exempt any
person or transactions from any provision of the Act if such exemption
is necessary or appropriate in the public interest and consistent with
the protection of investors and the purposes fairly intended by the
policy and provisions of the Act.
    4. Applicants submit that the proposed transactions satisfy the
standards for relief under sections 17(b) and 6(c) of the Act.
Applicants state that the terms upon which an Underlying Fund will sell
its shares to or purchase its shares from a DWS Fund of Funds will be
based on the net asset value of each Underlying Fund.\7\ Applicants
state that the proposed investment will be consistent with the policies
of each DWS Fund of Funds and Underlying Fund, and with the general
purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Applicants note that a DWS Fund of Funds generally would
purchase and sell shares of an Unaffiliated Underlying Fund that
operates as an ETF through secondary market transactions at market
prices rather than through principal transactions with the
Unaffiliated Underlying Fund at net asset value. Applicants would
not rely on the requested relief from section 17(a) for such
secondary market transactions. To the extent that a DWS Fund of
Funds purchases or redeems shares from an Unaffiliated Underlying
Fund that is an ETF and an affiliated person of the DWS Fund of
Funds in exchange for a basket of specified securities as described
in the application for the exemptive order upon which the ETF
relies, applicants also request relief from section 17(a) for those
transactions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Applicants' Conditions

    Applicants agree that any order granting the requested relief will
be subject to the following conditions:
    1. The members of the Group will not control (individually or in
the aggregate) an Unaffiliated Underlying Fund within the meaning of
section 2(a)(9) of the Act. The members of a Subadviser Group will not
control (individually or in the aggregate) an Unaffiliated Underlying
Fund within the meaning of section 2(a)(9) of the Act. If, as a result
of a decrease in the outstanding voting securities of an Unaffiliated
Underlying Fund, the Group or the Subadviser Group, each in the
aggregate, becomes a holder of more than 25 percent of the outstanding
voting securities of the Unaffiliated Underlying Fund, then the Group
or the Subadviser Group (except for any member of the Group or
Subadviser Group that is a Separate Account) will vote its shares of
the Unaffiliated Underlying Fund in the same proportion as the vote of
all other holders of the Unaffiliated Underlying Fund's shares. This
condition will not apply to the Subadviser Group with respect to an
Unaffiliated Underlying Fund for which the Subadviser or a person
controlling, controlled by, or under common control with the Subadviser
acts as the investment adviser within the meaning of section
2(a)(20)(A) of the Act (in the case of an Unaffiliated Fund) or the
sponsor (in the case of an Unaffiliated Trust). A Registered Separate
Account will seek voting instructions from its Variable Contract
holders and will vote its shares of an Unaffiliated Underlying Fund in
accordance with the instructions received and will vote those shares
for which no instructions were received in the same proportion as the
shares for which instructions were received. An Unregistered Separate
Account will either (a) vote its shares of the Unaffiliated Underlying
Fund in the same proportion as the vote of all other holders of the
Unaffiliated Underlying Fund's shares, or (b) seek voting instructions
from its Variable Contract holders and vote its shares in accordance
with the instructions received and vote those shares for which no
instructions were received in the same proportion as the shares for
which instructions were received.
    2. No DWS Fund of Funds or DWS Fund of Funds Affiliate will cause
any existing or potential investment by the DWS Fund of Funds in shares
of an Unaffiliated Underlying Fund to influence the terms of any
services or transactions between the DWS Fund of Funds or a DWS Fund of
Funds Affiliate

and the Unaffiliated Underlying Fund or an Unaffiliated Underlying Fund
Affiliate.
    3. Each DWS Fund of Funds Board, including a majority of the
Disinterested Trustees, will adopt procedures reasonably designed to
ensure that the Adviser and any Subadviser are conducting the
investment program of the DWS Fund of Funds without taking into account
any consideration received by the DWS Fund of Funds or a DWS Fund of
Funds Affiliate from an Unaffiliated Underlying Fund or an Unaffiliated
Underlying Fund Affiliate in connection with any services or
transactions.
    4. Once an investment by a DWS Fund of Funds in the securities of
an Unaffiliated Fund exceeds the limit contained in section
12(d)(1)(A)(i) of the Act, the Board of the Unaffiliated Fund,
including a majority of the Disinterested Trustees, will determine that
any consideration paid by the Unaffiliated Fund to a DWS Fund of Funds
or a DWS Fund of Funds Affiliate in connection with any services or
transactions: (a) Is fair and reasonable in relation to the nature and
quality of the services and benefits received by the Unaffiliated Fund;
(b) is within the range of consideration that the Unaffiliated Fund
would be required to pay to another unaffiliated entity in connection
with the same services or transactions; and (c) does not involve
overreaching on the part of any person concerned. This condition does
not apply with respect to any services or transactions between an
Unaffiliated Fund and its investment adviser(s) or any person
controlling, controlled by, or under common control with such
investment adviser(s).
    5. No DWS Fund of Funds or DWS Fund of Funds Affiliate (except to
the extent it is acting in its capacity as an investment adviser to an
Unaffiliated Fund or sponsor to an Unaffiliated Trust) will cause an
Unaffiliated Underlying Fund to purchase a security in an Affiliated
Underwriting.
    6. The Board of an Unaffiliated Fund, including a majority of the
Disinterested Trustees, will adopt procedures reasonably designed to
monitor any purchases of securities by the Unaffiliated Fund in an
Affiliated Underwriting once an investment by a DWS Fund of Funds in
the securities of the Unaffiliated Fund exceeds the limit contained in
section 12(d)(1)(A)(i) of the Act, including any purchases made
directly from an Underwriting Affiliate. The Board of the Unaffiliated
Fund will review these purchases periodically, but no less frequently
than annually, to determine whether the purchases were influenced by
the investment by the DWS Fund of Funds in shares of the Unaffiliated
Fund. The Board of the Unaffiliated Fund will consider, among other
things, (a) whether the purchases were consistent with the investment
objectives and policies of the Unaffiliated Fund; (b) how the
performance of securities purchased in an Affiliated Underwriting
compared to the performance of comparable securities purchased during a
comparable period of time in underwritings other than Affiliated
Underwritings or to a benchmark such as a comparable market index; and
(c) whether the amount of securities purchased by the Unaffiliated Fund
in Affiliated Underwritings and the amount purchased directly from an
Underwriting Affiliate have changed significantly from prior years. The
Board of the Unaffiliated Fund will take any appropriate actions based
on its review, including, if appropriate, the institution of procedures
designed to assure that purchases of securities in Affiliated
Underwritings are in the best interests of shareholders.
    7. Each Unaffiliated Fund will maintain and preserve permanently in
an easily accessible place a written copy of the procedures described
in the preceding condition, and any modifications to such procedures,
and it will maintain and preserve for a period of not less than six
years from the end of the fiscal year in which any purchase in an
Affiliated Underwriting occurred, the first two years in an easily
accessible place, a written record of each purchase of securities in an
Affiliated Underwriting once an investment by a DWS Fund of Funds in
the securities of an Unaffiliated Fund exceeds the limit contained in
section 12(d)(1)(A)(i) of the Act, setting forth from whom the
securities were acquired, the identities of the underwriting
syndicate's members, the terms of the purchase, and the information or
materials upon which the determinations of the Board of the
Unaffiliated Fund were made.
    8. Before making an investment in shares of an Unaffiliated Fund in
an amount in excess of the limit contained in section 12(d)(1)(A)(i) of
the Act, the DWS Fund of Funds and the Unaffiliated Fund will execute a
Participation Agreement stating, without limitation, that their boards
of directors or trustees and their investment advisers understand the
terms and conditions of the order and agree to fulfill their
responsibilities under the order. At the time of making its investment
in shares of an Unaffiliated Fund in an amount in excess of the limit
contained in section 12(d)(1)(A)(i), the DWS Fund of Funds will notify
the Unaffiliated Fund of the investment. At such time, the DWS Fund of
Funds will also transmit to the Unaffiliated Fund a list of the names
of each DWS Fund of Funds Affiliate and Underwriting Affiliate. The DWS
Fund of Funds will notify the Unaffiliated Fund of any changes to the
list as soon as reasonably practicable after a change occurs. The
Unaffiliated Fund and the DWS Fund of Funds will maintain and preserve
a copy of the order, the Participation Agreement, and the list with any
updated information for the duration of the investment and for a period
of not less than six years thereafter, the first two years in an easily
accessible place.
    9. Prior to approving any advisory contract under section 15 of the
Act, each DWS Fund of Funds Board, including a majority of the
Disinterested Trustees, will be required to find that the advisory fees
charged under the advisory contract are based on services provided that
are in addition to, rather than duplicative of, the services provided
under the advisory contract(s) of any Underlying Funds in which the DWS
Fund of Funds may invest. This finding, and the basis upon which the
finding was made, will be recorded fully in the minute books of the
appropriate DWS Fund of Funds.
    10. The Adviser will waive fees otherwise payable to it by the DWS
Fund of Funds in an amount at least equal to any compensation
(including fees received pursuant to a plan adopted by an Unaffiliated
Fund under rule 12b-1 under the Act) received from an Unaffiliated
Underlying Fund by the Adviser, or an affiliated person of the Adviser,
other than any advisory fees paid to the Adviser or an affiliated
person of the Adviser by an Unaffiliated Fund, in connection with the
investment by the DWS Fund of Funds in the Unaffiliated Underlying
Fund. Any Subadviser will waive fees otherwise payable to the
Subadviser, directly or indirectly, by the DWS Fund of Funds in an
amount at least equal to any compensation received from an Unaffiliated
Underlying Fund by the Subadviser, or any affiliated person of the
Subadviser, other than any advisory fees paid to the Subadviser or an
affiliated person of the Subadviser by an Unaffiliated Fund, in
connection with the investment by the DWS Fund of Funds in the
Unaffiliated Underlying Fund made at the direction of the Subadviser.
In the event that the Subadviser waives such fees, the benefit of the
waiver will be passed through to the DWS Fund of Funds.
    11. No Underlying Fund will acquire securities of any other
investment

company or company relying on section 3(c)(1) or 3(c)(7) of the Act in
an amount in excess of the limits contained in section 12(d)(1)(A) of
the Act, except to the extent that such Underlying Fund: (a) Receives
securities of another investment company as a dividend or as a result
of a plan of reorganization of a company (other than a plan devised for
the purpose of evading section 12(d)(1) of the Act); or (b) acquires
(or is deemed to have acquired) securities of another investment
company pursuant to exemptive relief from the Commission permitting
such Underlying Fund to (i) acquire securities of one or more
investment companies for short-term cash management purposes, or (ii)
engage in interfund borrowing and lending transactions.
    12. With respect to Registered Separate Accounts that invest in a
DWS Fund of Funds, no sales load will be charged at the DWS Fund of
Funds level or at the Underlying Fund level. Other sales charges and
service fees, as defined in NASD Conduct Rule 2830, if any, will be
charged at the DWS Fund of Funds level or at the Underlying Fund level,
not both. With respect to other investments in a DWS Fund of Funds, any
sales charges and/or service fees charged with respect to shares of a
DWS Fund of Funds will not exceed the limits applicable to a fund of
funds set forth in NASD Conduct Rule 2830.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
pursuant to delegated authority.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-14356 Filed 6-14-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 52 (Friday, March 19, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15019-15020]
[FR Doc No: 2021-05718]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2020-0178]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Approval of a Revision
of an Information Collection Request: Financial Responsibility for
Motor Carriers of Passengers and Motor Carriers of Property

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FMCSA
announces its plan to submit the Information Collection Request (ICR)
described below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for its
review and approval and invites public comment. The information
collected will be used to help ensure that motor carriers of passengers
and property maintain appropriate levels of financial responsibility to
operate on public highways.

DATES: Please send your comments by April 19, 2021. OMB must receive
your comments by this date in order to act quickly on the ICR.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and recommendations for the proposed
information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of
this notice to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular
information collection by selecting ``Currently under 30-day Review--
Open for Public Comments'' or by using the search function.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Jeff Secrist, Office of
Registration, Chief, Registration, Licensing and Insurance Division,
Department of Transportation, Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration, West Building 6th Floor, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Office hours are from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal Holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title: Financial Responsibility for Motor Carriers of Passengers
and Motor Carriers of Property.
    OMB Control Number: 2126-0008.
    Type of Request: Revision of a currently-approved information
collection.
    Respondents: Insurance underwriters for insurance companies and
financial specialists for surety companies of motor carriers of
property (Forms MCS-90 and MCS-82) and passengers (Forms MCS-90B and
MCS-82B), and motor carrier compliance officers employed by motor
carriers to store and maintain insurance and/or surety bond
documentation in motor carrier vehicles.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 140,074.
    Estimated Time per Response: FMCSA estimates that it takes 2
minutes to complete the Endorsement for Motor Carrier Policies of
Insurance for Public Liability under Sections 29 and 30 of the Motor
Carrier Act of 1980 (Form MCS-90 for property carriers) and Endorsement
for Motor Carrier Policies of Insurance for Public Liability under
Section 18 of the Bus Regulatory Reform Act of 1982 (MCS-90B for
passenger carriers) or the Motor Carrier Public Liability Surety Bond
under Sections 29 and 30 of the Motor Carrier Act of 1980 (Form MCS-82
for property carriers) and Motor Carrier Public Liability Surety Bond
under Section 18 of the Bus Regulatory Reform Act of 1982 (MCS-82B for
passenger carriers); 1

minute to store/maintain documents at the motor carrier's principal
place of business [49 CFR 387.7(d); 49 CFR 387.31(d)]; and 1 minute per
vehicle to place the respective document on board the vehicle as
required for non U.S.-domiciled carriers with the exception of Non
North American(NNA) who are required to maintain a copy at their
Principal Place of Business (PPOB) and file with FMCSA[49 CFR 387.7(f);
49 CFR 387.31(f) 49 CFR part 387.7(e)(2)].
    Expiration Date: March 31, 2021.
    Frequency of Response: On a one-time basis or as needed.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 4,146 hours.
    FMCSA published the 60-day Federal Register notice on October 8,
2020 (85 FR 63648), and received 2 comments in response. The first
comment, from the National School Transportation Association (NSTA),
supports the proposal to renew the MCS-82B and MCS-90B information
collection to verify proof of motor carrier financial responsibility.
The second comment, from The American Property Casualty Insurance
Association (APCIA), raised three issues: (1) That [t]he MCS-90 form is
sometimes erroneously treated by trucking regulators as a simple
certification of insurance coverage'' and that extension of an
insurer's liability ``could be easily fixed by limiting the MCS-90 to
apply only to accidents occurring inside the United States . . .''; (2)
that keeping the expiration date on the financial responsibility forms
creates confusion; and (3) that the unintended consequence related to
changes of the MCS-90 web pages is that some users believe a change in
the web page equates to a change in the MCS-90 itself.
    With regard to the first issue, Property Casualty Insurers of
America (PCI), a predecessor to APCIA, previously filed a Petition for
Rulemaking with FMCSA pertaining to the extension of MCS-90 liability
to Mexico. However, given the decision in Lincoln General Ins. Co. v.
De La Luz Garcia, 501 F.3d 436 (5th Cir. 2007) that effectively granted
(PCI) the relief it was seeking in its Petition for Rulemaking, FMCSA
decided not to address PCI's petition further at that time. The Minimum
Levels of Financial Responsibility for Motor Carriers, is noted in the
Federal Register Notice 74 FR 27485, 27487 dated (June 10, 2009).
Therefore, given that APCIA's concerns have been previously addressed,
FMCSA does not believe changing the MCS-90 is necessary. Additionally,
FMCSA does not believe that even if a change was necessary that an ICR
proceeding is an appropriate forum for such a change. FMCSA welcomes
discussing APCIA's concerns informally and is happy to have a meeting
with APCIA to discuss further. With regard to the comment on the
expiration date, the commenter noted that the regulation requires that
the MCS-90 and its accompanying insurance filing be continuous until
canceled, but that having expiration dates on the forms ``creates
confusion and could change the meaning of the endorsement in the eyes
of a court. It needlessly causes motor carriers to worry that their
insurance coverage might not satisfy federal requirements, especially
as this bureaucratic date often falls behind its intended expiration.''
APCIA goes on to argue that the date often confuses law enforcement as
to if the date refers to the insurer's insurance policy rather than the
form. FMCSA agrees with the comment and requests permission to exclude
the expiration date from all forms.
    With regard to the comment on website updates, FMCSA will look into
ensuring that any future updates to our web page are more clear.
    Background: The Secretary of Transportation is responsible for
implementing regulations which establish minimum levels of financial
responsibility for: (1) For-hire motor carriers of property to cover
public liability, property damage, and environmental restoration, and
(2) for-hire motor carriers of passengers to cover public liability and
property damage. The forms MCS-90/90B and forms MCS-82/82B contain the
minimum amount of information necessary to document that a motor
carrier of property or passengers has obtained, and has in effect, the
minimum levels of financial responsibility as set forth in applicable
regulations (49 CFR 387.9 (motor carriers of property) and 49 CFR
387.33T (motor carriers of passengers)). FMCSA and the public can
verify that a motor carrier of property or passengers has obtained, and
has in effect, the required minimum levels of financial responsibility
by reviewing the information enclosed within these documents.
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of
this information collection, including: (1) Whether the proposed
collection is necessary for the FMCSA to perform its functions; (2) the
accuracy of the estimated burden; (3) ways for the FMCSA to enhance the
quality, usefulness, and clarity of the collected information; and (4)
ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of
the collected information.

    Issued under the authority delegated in 49 CFR 1.87.
Thomas P. Keane,
Associate Administrator, Office of Research and Registration.
[FR Doc. 2021-05718 Filed 3-18-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P