[Federal Register: April 17, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 73)]
[Notices]
[Page 19225-19227]
[DOCID:fr17ap07-88]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-55615; File No. SR-NYSE-2007-34]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Amend NYSE Rule 80A.40(b)
To Update the Definition of ``Program Trading,'' To Substitute
Simplified Audit Trail Requirements, and To Make Conforming Amendments
to NYSE Rule 410B

April 11, 2007.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on March 22, 2007, the New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II
and III below, which Items have been prepared substantially by NYSE.
The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    NYSE proposes to amend NYSE Rule 80A.40(b) to update the definition
of ``program trading'' by eliminating the pre-determined minimum dollar
value requirement for trading strategies that involve the related
purchase or sale of a ``basket'' or group of 15 or more stocks, to
substitute simplified audit trail requirements, and to make conforming
amendments to Rule 410B. The text of the proposed rule change is
available at NYSE, http://www.nyse.com, and the Commission's Public

Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    In order to improve the reporting and monitoring of program trading
by the Exchange, NYSE proposes to clarify what constitutes program
trading and to streamline the process for entering and identifying
program trades. To accomplish this, the Exchange is proposes (i) to
amend NYSE Rule 80A.40 to eliminate the minimum dollar value from the
definition of program trading, and (ii) to substitute simplified audit
trail requirements in place of the more cumbersome reporting
requirements that currently apply to program trading. The proposed
amendments also include certain conforming amendments to NYSE Rule
410B. In connection with these changes, the Exchange also intends to
issue guidance regarding the definition of a ``coordinated strategy,''
as that term is used in Rule 80A.40.
    Background. The Exchange adopted Rule 80A in the wake of the 1987
market break to address various coordinated professional trading
strategies, in particular, program trading that was using the cash
market to take advantage of trading in the derivatives market. To
ensure that the rule would encompass the various permutations that such
trading strategies might take, the Exchange defined program trading as
either index arbitrage or ``any trading strategy involving the related
purchase or sale of a 'basket' or group of 15 or more stocks having a
total market value of $1 million or more.'' The monetary value was
believed at the time to capture program trading strategies that would
be significant in the context of the market. Despite a significant
increase in the size and value of trading in the market since 1987,
however, this monetary component of the definition has not been updated
since it was adopted.
    Proposed Redefinition of Program Trading. Given the technical and
automated nature of the trading environment that exists today, the
Exchange believes that the current definition of ``program trading'' is
no longer workable, since, among other things, it captures certain
computer-driven or algorithmic trading strategies that are not intended
to be program trades. At the same time, certain strategies that could
fairly be classified as programs--that is, strategies involving 15 or
more stocks that are intended to be coordinated, but which do not meet
the monetary threshold--are not being captured.
    In contrast to 1987, most firms today employ algorithmic trading to
manage and carry out both plain-vanilla execution strategies that are
not intended to be programs, including public-customer driven
parameter-based trading (that is, trading in which the customer
specifies certain desired execution conditions such as timing, pricing,
quantity, or marketplace selection, and the algorithm evaluates market
information and generates orders that best match the specified
conditions without further human intervention), and more complex
trading strategies that are intended to be programs. The Exchange
therefore recognizes that not all computer-driven trading strategies
constitute Program Trading. For example, if they otherwise lack the
other definitional characteristics of program trading, algorithmic
trading, volume-weighted average price (``VWAP'') trading, statistical
arbitrage, and similar computer-driven trading strategies may not need
to be classified or reported as a program simply because the strategy
is executed through a computer model or ``black box.''
    This has led to regulatory confusion; indeed, member firms have
informed the Exchange that in order to ensure full compliance with the
rule, they feel compelled to report computer-driven trading strategies
that meet the technical definition of a program even though they are
not, in fact, intended as program trading.
    To address the issue of the overbroad definition of program trading
and to improve the precision of program trade reporting, the Exchange
proposes to amend the definition of program trading under NYSE Rule
80A.40 to eliminate

the requirement that program trades must have a combined value of $1
million or more. The Exchange believes that the minimum dollar value
currently contained in Rule 80A.40 establishes an arbitrary and
artificial bar for determining whether a coordinated strategy
constitutes program trading. In the absence of the dollar threshold,
the Exchange proposes assessing whether a trading program constitutes a
coordinated strategy examining its attributes rather than relying on
such an arbitrary limitation.
    To assist firms in determining whether a particular set of trades
constitutes a ``program,'' the Exchange intends to issue guidance to
member organizations regarding factors to consider in determining
whether a trading strategy is ``coordinated.'' This guidance will focus
on how the primary investment objective of the trading, as well as the
linkage or dependency between and among simultaneous (or substantially
simultaneous) trades in different securities, relate to the investment
objective. As described more fully below, under the revised rule, the
Exchange would consider any execution of 15 or more stocks that is
entered as part of a single investment strategy (including liquidation,
rebalancing, or realignment of a basket/portfolio) with the intention
to execute all or most of the stocks to be a ``coordinated strategy.''
    ``Coordinated strategies'' would include any purchase or sale of 15
or more stocks that is (i) coordinated pursuant to a broader investment
strategy such as economic, financial, or fundamental characteristics
(such as a particular industry, sector, or industry) or market
activity, and (ii) where the execution of the securities within the
portfolio is linked, as opposed to being merely coincidental single
stock definitions. A coordinated strategy would include a portfolio or
basket strategy of 15 or more stocks wherein each stock execution is
dependent upon the execution of all or most of the securities within
the portfolio or basket. And, as before, program trading would also
include all index arbitrage trading. Accordingly, any strategy that
attempts to capture identified mispricings between an S&P 500 component
security and its related future as the filters for buying or selling
such stock, regardless of the number of stocks involved, is a program.
    As noted above, not all computer-driven trading strategies would be
defined as program trading. For example, portfolio VWAP transactions
that attempt to provide a customer with an average price for the
purchase or sale of stocks would not necessarily be a program. For VWAP
trading to constitute a program, the trading would have to involve a
portfolio or basket of 15 or more stocks as part of a coordinated
strategy.
    In addition, pairs trading, in which stocks are put into pairs by
fundamental or market-based similarities and traded versus each other,
would not necessarily be program trading. For pairs trading to fall
within the program trading definition, the engine or algorithm used for
execution of the selected pairs would have to consist of a group of
related stocks that would be defined as a program, e.g., an automative
``pairs'' algorithm that typically trades more than 15 different
automotive stocks.
    Streamlining Reporting of Program Trades. The Exchange is also
proposing to streamline the reporting process that member organizations
must follow when reporting program trading. Since 1988, the Exchange
has required that member firms report program trading activities by the
close of business on the second business day following the trade date
on a Daily Program Trading Report (``DPTR''). Member firms currently
file their DPTRs via an electronic filing platform operated by the
Exchange.
    Because the DPTR is created after the trades have been executed,
rather than in connection with the entry of orders at issue, the DPTR
is potentially less accurate than determining program trading
information based on audit trail information, which captures trading
information at the time of execution. Moreover, because all information
reported on the DPTR is already available to the Exchange via audit
trail information, the DPTR has become redundant. Accordingly, to
streamline the reporting process, the Exchange is proposing to
eliminate the DPTR requirement, and to rely instead on audit trail
information to determine whether firms are engaging in program trading.
To assist in identifying program trading, the Exchange is redefining
two of the eight existing program trading related audit trail account
types so that member firms can mark the specific program trading
strategy at the time of order entry and execution, rather than waiting
to report via the DPTR.
    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed changes to Rules
80A and 410B would in any way compromise its existing surveillances, or
impair the ability to conduct additional surveillances, as necessary.
To the contrary, the Exchange believes that the proposed changes to the
definition of program trading and the revised audit trail information
will lead to more focused surveillances for assessing whether member
organizations engage in program trading.
2. Statutory Basis
    The basis under the Act for this proposed rule change is the
requirement under Section 6(b)(5) \3\ that an Exchange have rules that
are designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect
investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

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

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

    Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    A. By order approve such proposed rule change, or
    B. Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml.
); or     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File No. SR-NYSE-2007-34 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2007-34. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all

written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of NYSE.
    All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission
does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You
should submit only information that you wish to make available
publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2007-34
and should be submitted on or before May 8, 2007.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-7224 Filed 4-16-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 246 (Thursday, December 22, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 93820-93822]
[FR Doc No: 2016-30644]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2016-0322; FRL-9955-16-Region 9]

Approval and Limited Approval and Limited Disapproval of
California State Implementation Plan Revisions; Butte County Air
Quality Management District; Stationary Source Permits

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is finalizing action
on three permitting rules submitted as a revision to the Butte County
Air Quality Management District (BCAQMD) portion of the California
State Implementation Plan (SIP). We are finalizing a limited approval
and limited disapproval of one rule; we are finalizing approval of two
permitting rules; and we are deleting ten rules from the SIP. These
revisions concern the District's New Source Review (NSR) permitting
program for new and modified sources of air pollution. This limited
disapproval will trigger sanctions under CAA section 179 and 40 CFR
52.31 unless the EPA approves subsequent SIP revisions that correct the
rule deficiencies within 18 months of the effective date of the final
action.

DATES: This rule will be effective on January 23, 2017.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket No. EPA-R09-OAR-2016-0322. 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., CBI or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain
other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the
Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are available through http://www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional availability
information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thien Khoi Nguyen, EPA Region IX,
(415) 947-4120<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, the terms ``we,''
``us,'' and ``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Proposed Action

II. EPA Action
III. Incorporation by Reference
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Proposed Action

    On August 19, 2016 (81 FR 55402), the EPA proposed a limited
approval and limited disapproval (LA/LD) or a full approval (as noted
in the table) of the following rules that were submitted for
incorporation into the Butte County portion of the California SIP.

                                          Table 1--Submitted NSR Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Rule No.                 Rule title             Adopted        Submitted           Proposed action
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
400...................  Permit Requirements......        04/24/14        11/06/14  Full Approval.
401...................  Permit Exemptions........        04/24/14        11/06/14  Full Approval.
432...................  Federal New Source Review        04/24/14        11/06/14  LA/LD.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We proposed a full approval of Rules 400 and 401 as part of
BCAQMD's general NSR permitting program because we determined that
these rules meet the relevant CAA requirements. We proposed a limited
approval of Rule 432 because we determined that the rule improves the
SIP and is largely consistent with the relevant CAA requirements. We
simultaneously proposed a limited disapproval of Rule 432 because we
determined that the rule does not fully satisfy CAA section 189(e)
requirements for regulation of PM2.5 precursors. The rule
does not specify ammonia as a PM2.5 precursor and the
demonstration provided by Butte County as part of its NSR program
submittal is not adequate to allow the Administrator to determine
whether potential new major sources and major modifications of ammonia
emissions will or will not contribute significantly to PM2.5
levels that exceed the standard in the area. We also proposed to remove
ten existing rules from the SIP, as the submitted rules replaced the
content of these pre-existing rules in the SIP.
    The EPA also proposed to find that it is acceptable for BCAQMD to
not incorporate the NSR Reform provisions of 40 CFR 51.165 into its NSR
permit program because BCAQMD's permitting program will not be any less
stringent than the federal permitting program. In addition, the EPA
proposed to find that Rules 400, 401 and 432 meet the statutory
requirements for SIP revisions as specified in sections 110(l) and 193
of the CAA.

II. EPA Action

    No comments were submitted. Therefore, as authorized in sections
110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the Act, the EPA is finalizing approval of Rule
400 and Rule 401, and finalizing a limited approval and limited
disapproval of Rule 432 into the BCAQMD portion of the California SIP.
This action will incorporate the submitted rules into the SIP,
including those provisions identified as deficient. The approval of
Rule 432 is limited because the EPA is simultaneously finalizing a
limited disapproval of Rule 432 under section 110(k)(3). This limited
disapproval will trigger sanctions under CAA section 179 and 40 CFR
52.31 unless the EPA approves subsequent SIP revisions that correct the
rule deficiencies within 18 months of the effective date of the final
action.
    Note that Rule 432 has been adopted by the BCAQMD, and the EPA's
final limited disapproval will not prevent the local agency from
enforcing it. The limited disapproval also will not prevent any portion
of the rule from being incorporated by reference into the federally
enforceable SIP as discussed in a July 9, 1992 EPA memo found at:
http://www.epa.gov/nsr/ttnnsr01/gen/pdf/memo-s.pdf.
    In addition, because we are finalizing our proposed action, we are
removing existing Rules 4-4, 401, 402, 403, 405, 406, 407, 420, 421 and
424 from the Butte County portion of the California SIP.

III. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, the EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the
BCAQMD rules described in the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth
below. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents
generally available electronically through www.regulations.gov and in
hard copy at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX (Air-
3), 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at http://www2.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review 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 (PRA)

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the PRA because this action does not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This
action will not impose any requirements on small entities beyond those
imposed by state law.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. This action does not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, no additional costs to
State, local, or tribal governments, or to the private sector, will
result from this action.

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: Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175, because the SIP is not approved to apply on any
Indian

reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe
has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction, and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
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 impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by state law.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions 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 (NTTAA)

    Section 12(d) of the NTTAA directs the EPA to use voluntary
consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so would
be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. The EPA
believes that this action is not subject to the requirements of section
12(d) of the NTTAA because application of those requirements would be
inconsistent with the CAA.

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

    The EPA lacks the discretionary authority to address environmental
justice in this rulemaking.

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).

L. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by February 21, 2017. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such
rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings
to enforce its requirements (see section 307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, New Source Review, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.

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

    Dated: October 31, 2016.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.

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

PART 52 [AMENDED]

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

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

Subpart F--California

0
2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraphs (b)(15),
(c)(168)(i)(A)(8) and (9), (c)(222)(i)(E)(2), and (c)(457)(i)(C)(2),
(3) and (4) to read as follows:

Sec.  52.220  Identification of plan--in part.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (15) Butte County Air Quality Management District.
    (i) Previously approved on May 31, 1972 in paragraph (b) of this
section and now deleted with replacement paragraphs (c)(457)(i)(C)(2)
and (3), respectively: Rule 405 ``Permit Conditions'' and Rule 04-04
``Exemptions from Permit Requirements.''
    (c) * * *
    (168) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (A) * * *
    (8) Previously approved on February 3, 1987 in paragraph
(c)(168)(i)(A)(1) of this section and now deleted with replacement in
paragraph (c)(457)(i)(C)(2): Rule 401 ``General Requirements,'' Rule
402 ``Authority to Construct,'' Rule 406 ``Emission Calculations,''
Rule 407 ``Anniversary Date,'' Rule 420 ``Standards for Granting
Applications,'' and Rule 421 ``Conditional Approval''.
    (9) Previously approved on May 2, 2001 in paragraph
(c)(168)(i)(A)(4) of this section and now deleted with replacement in
paragraph (c)(457)(i)(C)(2): Rule 424 ``State Implementation Plan.''
* * * * *
    (222) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (E) * * *
    (2) Previously approved on May 2, 2001 in paragraph
(c)(222)(i)(E)(1) of this section and now deleted with replacement in
paragraph (c)(457)(i)(C)(2): Rule 403 ``Permit to Operate.''
* * * * *
    (457) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (C) * * *
    (2) Rule 400, ``Permit Requirements,'' amended on April 24, 2014.
    (3) Rule 401, ``Permit Exemptions,'' amended on April 24, 2014.
    (4) Rule 432, ``Federal New Source Review,'' amended on April 24,
2014.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016-30644 Filed 12-21-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 32 (Tuesday, February 18, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8875-8877]
[FR Doc No: 2020-03160]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2020-N-0597]

Request for Information on Vaping Products Associated With Lung
Injuries

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice; request for information.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is opening a docket to
obtain data and information related to the use of vaping products that
are associated with recent lung injuries. This request for information
(RFI) responds to direction from Congress to gather information from
the public that could help identify and evaluate additional steps the
Agency could take to ``address the recent pulmonary illnesses reported
to be associated with the use of e-cigarettes and vaping products.''
FDA is seeking information on product design and potential ways to
prevent consumers from modifying or adding substances to these products
that are not intended by the manufacturers. In particular, FDA is
seeking data and information in the form of reports and manuscripts
that are unpublished or not available through indexed bibliographic
databases. FDA has searched the publicly available scientific
literature and is now seeking to supplement that with information not
included in the published scientific literature.

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments or information by
April 20, 2020.

ADDRESSES: You may submit either electronic or written comments as
follows:

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2020-N-0597 for ``Request for Information on Vaping Products
Associated With Lung Injuries.'' Received comments will be placed in
the docket and, except for those submitted as ``Confidential
Submissions,'' publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at
the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish
your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you
can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of
your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not
be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other
applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of
comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or
access the information at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Samantha LohCollado, Center for
Tobacco Products, Food and Drug Administration, Document Control
Center, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. G335, Silver Spring, MD
20993-0002, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>1-877-287-1373.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    FDA is announcing the opening of a docket entitled ``Request for
Information on Vaping Products Associated With Lung Injuries.''
    FDA remains deeply concerned about the recent lung injuries and
deaths and is working closely with other agencies, as well as State and
local public health partners, to investigate these incidents. To help
gather and analyze as much information as possible, FDA is working
closely with Federal and State partners to identify the vaping products
or other substances that may be causing the injuries. Specifically, FDA
is analyzing samples submitted by a number of States for the presence
of a broad range of chemicals, including nicotine, tetrahydrocannabinol
(THC) and other cannabinoids, along with cutting agents/diluents and
other additives, pesticides, opioids, poisons, heavy metals, and
toxins. As of February 3, 2020, FDA has received over 1,300 samples
from 31 States and 1 territory with roughly 1,070 of these samples
connected to patients.\1\ These samples have been collected directly
from consumers, hospitals, and State offices. They have included vaping
devices and products containing varied levels of liquid as well as
packaging and other documentation. FDA has not found one product or
substance that is implicated in all of the cases; however, we do know
that THC is present in most of the samples being tested and many of
these samples have vitamin E acetate as a diluent. FDA is following all
potential leads and is committed to taking appropriate actions as
additional facts emerge.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ For more information regarding FDA's current efforts to
identify and address lung injuries related to the use of vaping
products, please see https://www.fda.gov/news-events/public-health-focus/lung-illnesses-associated-use-vaping-products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On December 20, 2019, the President signed the ``Further
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020'' which directs FDA to issue a
RFI to solicit information regarding ``the recent pulmonary illnesses
reported to be associated with the use of e-cigarettes and vaping
products.'' \2\ To further this goal, FDA is seeking information
related to the use of vaping products that are associated with the
recent lung injuries, including public comment on product design and
ways to prevent the public from modifying or adding substances to these
products that are not intended by the manufacturer. This information
may be used by FDA to inform future rulemaking and review of industry
premarket application submissions, or in taking other regulatory
actions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020, Public Law
116-94, Sec.  785. FDA uses the term ``vaping products'' for
purposes of this RFI. ``Vaping products'' include e-cigarettes as
well as other electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS). See
``Guidance for Industry: Enforcement Priorities for Electronic
Nicotine Delivery Systems (ENDS) and Other Deemed Products on the
Market Without Premarket Authorization,'' available at https://www.fda.gov/industry/fda-basics-industry/guidances (defining
``ENDS'' as including ``include devices, components, and/or parts
that deliver aerosolized e-liquid when inhaled. For example, FDA
considers vapes or vape pens, personal vaporizers, e-cigarettes,
cigalikes, e-pens, e-hookahs, e-cigars, and e-pipes to be ENDS.'')
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Request for Information

    FDA seeks to obtain data and information related to the use of
vaping products that are associated with recent lung injuries. FDA has
searched the publicly available scientific literature and is now
seeking to supplement that search with information from other sources,
specifically unpublished data or other information. If the work is not
directly conducted in tobacco products,

responses should include a discussion of how the information or data
can be applied specifically to tobacco products or to lung injuries
associated with the use of vaping products.
    For this RFI, FDA is requesting: (1) Unpublished data or
information (summarized); (2) unpublished or prepublication copies of
manuscripts, conference presentations, and/or posters; (3)
dissertations and/or theses; and (4) white papers or other unpublished
reports. FDA is requesting data and information from all interested
parties, including, but not limited to, academic and government
researchers, industry, and any other sources.
    Specifically, FDA is requesting unpublished data or information on
the following:
     Specific chemicals, compounds, ingredients or combinations
of ingredients that when inhaled or aerosolized, may be associated with
the symptoms observed in ``e-cigarette, or vaping, product use-
associated lung injury'' (EVALI) patients; e.g., cough, chest pain,
shortness of breath, abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, fever,
chills; \3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ For more information concerning the symptoms observed in
EVALI patients, please see https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/basic_information/e-cigarettes/severe-lung-disease/need-to-know/index.html#symptoms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     nature of pulmonary pathological changes associated with
inhaling the specific chemicals, compounds, ingredients, or
combinations of ingredients that elicit the symptoms observed in EVALI;
     methods or sources for obtaining chemicals, compounds,
ingredients, or combinations of ingredients, other than those intended
by the manufacturer, that are added to vaping products;
     in what ways and how frequently consumers add chemicals,
compounds, ingredients or combinations of ingredients, other than those
intended by the manufacturer, to vaping products and how these changes
affect the health impacts, frequency, and patterns of consumer use of
the products;
     methods for identifying and detecting materials added or
modifications to vaping products after the manufacturing process and
not intended by the manufacturer; and
     methods of changing the manufacturing process or product
design features for vaping products that will reduce or prevent
consumers from modifying products after the manufacturing process.
    Data may come from studies outside of the United States; however,
FDA prefers that reports be submitted in English.
    When submitting information, please include details about how the
data were collected, including the sample composition, year(s) of data
collection, and a detailed summary of the methods and measures used.
For data summaries, please include both point estimates and measures of
variance, as well as effect sizes (if available).
    Please also note that when submitting information and data to the
docket, certain compressed file formats (e.g., zip files) are not
allowed. Acceptable file formats include: .doc, .docx, .pdf, .ppt,
.pptx, .rtf, .txt, .xls, .xlsx, .xlsm, .xlsb, and .wpd.

    Dated: February 12, 2020.
Lowell J. Schiller,
Principal Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2020-03160 Filed 2-14-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 232 (Friday, December 2, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 86975-86977]
[FR Doc No: 2016-28621]

========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 232 / Friday, December 2, 2016 /
Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2016-9431; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-104-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Airbus Model A321 series airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by a
determination from fatigue testing on the Model A321 airframe that
cracks could develop on holes at certain fuselage frame locations. This
proposed AD would require repetitive inspections for cracking on holes
at certain fuselage frame locations, and repairs if necessary. We are
proposing this AD to prevent the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by January 17,
2017.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Airbus,
Airworthiness Office--EIAS, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707
Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 44
51; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.airbus.com. You may view this referenced service information at the
FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA.
For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
9431; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for the Docket
Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section.
Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2016-9431;
Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-104-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD based on those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2016-0106, dated June 6, 2016 (referred to
after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition on all Airbus Model A321
series airplanes. The MCAI states:

    Following a new full scale fatigue test campaign on the A321
airframe, in the context of the A321 extended service goal, it was
identified that cracks could develop on holes at frame (FR) 35.2A
between stringers (STR) 22 and STR 23 on right hand (RH) and left
hand (LH) sides, also on aeroplanes operated in the context of
design service goal.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could reduce the
structural integrity of the fuselage.
    Prompted by these findings, Airbus developed an inspection
programme, published in Service Bulletin (SB) A320-53-1315 and SB
A320-53-1316, each containing instructions for a different location.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires
repetitive special detailed (rototest) inspections (SDI) of the
affected holes [for cracking] and, depending on findings,
accomplishment of a repair.
    This [EASA] AD is considered an interim action, pending
development of a permanent solution.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
9431.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Airbus has issued Service Bulletin A320-53-1315, dated January 13,
2016; and Service Bulletin A320-53-1316, dated January 13, 2016. This
service information describes procedures for doing a special detailed
inspection for cracking at the tooling holes on FR 35.2A between STR 22
and STR 23 and repairs. These documents are distinct since they apply
to different sides of the airplane. This service information is
reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it
through their normal course of business or by the means identified in
the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another

country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service
information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we
evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same
type design.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 175 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
             Action                     Labor cost           Parts cost     Cost per product       operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection.....................  12 work-hours x $85 per              $0   $1,020 per          $178,500 per
                                  hour = $1,020 per                         inspection cycle.   inspection
                                  inspection cycle.                                             cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide
cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this proposed
AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and
    4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

Airbus: Docket No. FAA-2016-9431; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-
104-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by January 17, 2017.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -
212, -213, -231, and -232 airplanes, certificated in any category,
all manufacturer serial numbers.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a determination from fatigue testing on
the Model A321 airframe that cracks could develop on holes at
certain fuselage frame locations. We are issuing this AD to detect
and correct cracking at certain hole locations in the fuselage
frame, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the
airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Repetitive Inspections

    At the later of the times specified in paragraphs (g)(1) and
(g)(2) of this AD: Do a special detailed (rototest) inspection for
cracking of the affected holes at frame 35.2A on the left-hand side
and right-hand side between stringer 22 and stringer 23, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service
Bulletin A320-53-1315, dated January 13, 2016 (right-hand side); and
Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1316, dated January 13, 2016 (left-
hand side). Repeat the inspection of the affected holes thereafter
at intervals not to exceed 21,500 flight cycles or 43,100 flight
hours, whichever occurs first.
    (1) Before exceeding 25,400 total flight cycles or 50,900 total
flight hours since first flight of the airplane, whichever occurs
first.
    (2) Within 3,300 flight cycles after the effective date of this
AD.

(h) Repair

    If any crack is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (g) of this AD: Before further flight, repair using a
method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety
Agency (EASA); or Airbus's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA).
Although the service information specified in paragraph (g) of this
AD specifies to contact Airbus for repair instructions, and
specifies that action as ``RC'' (Required for Compliance), this AD
requires repair as specified in this paragraph. Repair of an
airplane as required by this paragraph does not constitute
terminating action for the repetitive actions required by paragraph
(g) of this AD, unless specified otherwise in the instructions
provided by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus's EASA DOA.

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal
inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate.
If sending information directly to the International Branch, send it
to ATTN: Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch,
ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW.,
Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal
inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the
local flight standards district office/certificate holding district
office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or EASA; or
Airbus's EASA DOA. If approved by the DOA, the approval must include
the DOA-authorized signature.
    (3) Required for Compliance (RC): Except as required by
paragraph (h) of this AD: If any service information contains
procedures or tests that are identified as RC, those procedures and
tests must be done to comply with this AD; any procedures or tests
that are not identified as RC are recommended. Those procedures and
tests that are not identified as RC may be deviated from using
accepted methods in accordance with the operator's maintenance or
inspection program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided
the procedures and tests identified as RC can be done and the
airplane can be put back in an airworthy condition. Any
substitutions or changes to procedures or tests identified as RC
require approval of an AMOC.

(j) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2016-0106, dated June 6, 2016,
for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on
the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2016-9431.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus, Airworthiness Office--EIAS, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte,
31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5
61 93 44 51; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.airbus.com. You may view this service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA.
For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 16, 2016.
Phil Forde,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-28621 Filed 12-1-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 160 (Wednesday, August 19, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50325-50326]
[FR Doc No: 2015-20470]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2011-0862]

Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER)
Standard; Extension of the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB)
Approval of Information Collection (Paperwork) Requirements

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Request for public comments.

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

SUMMARY: OSHA solicits public comments concerning its proposal to
extend the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) approval of the
information collection requirements specified in the Hazardous Waste
Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER) Standard (29 CFR
1910.120).

DATES: Comments must be submitted (postmarked, sent, or received) by
October 19, 2015.

ADDRESSES:
    Electronically: You may submit comments and attachments
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal. Follow the instructions online for submitting
comments.
    Facsimile: If your comments, including attachments, are not longer
than 10 pages you may fax them to the OSHA Docket Office at (202) 693-
1648.
    Mail, hand delivery, express mail, messenger, or courier service:
When using this method, you must submit your comments and attachments
to the OSHA Docket Office, Docket No. OSHA-2011-0862, Occupational
Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N-
2625, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210. Deliveries
(hand, express mail, messenger, and courier service) are accepted
during the Department of Labor's and Docket Office's normal business
hours, 8:15 a.m. to 4:45 p.m., e.t.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency name and the
OSHA docket number (OSHA-2011-0862) for the Information Collection
Request (ICR). All comments, including any personal information you
provide, are placed in the public docket without change, and may be
made available online at http://www.regulations.gov. For further
information on submitting comments see the ``Public Participation''
heading in the section of this notice titled SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
    Docket: To read or download comments or other material in the
docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov or the OSHA Docket Office at
the address above. All documents in the docket (including this Federal
Register notice) are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index;
however, some information (e.g., copyrighted material) is not publicly
available to read or download from the Web site. All submissions,
including copyrighted material, are available for inspection and
copying at the OSHA Docket Office. You also may contact Theda Kenney at
the address below to obtain a copy of the ICR.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Theda Kenney or Todd Owen, Directorate
of Standards and Guidance, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N-3609,
200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202) 693-
2222.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Department of Labor, as part of its continuing effort to reduce
paperwork and respondent (i.e., employer) burden, conducts a
preclearance consultation program to provide the public with an
opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing information
collection requirements in accord with the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (PRA-95) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This program ensures that
information is in the desired format, reporting burden (time and costs)
is minimal, collection instruments are clearly understood, and OSHA's
estimate of the information collection burden is accurate. The
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (the OSH Act) (29 U.S.C. 651
et seq.) authorizes information collection by employers as necessary or
appropriate for enforcement of the OSH Act or for developing
information regarding the causes and prevention of occupational
injuries, illnesses, and accidents (29 U.S.C. 657). The OSH Act also
requires that OSHA obtain such information with minimum burden upon
employers, especially those operating small businesses, and to reduce
to the maximum extent feasible

unnecessary duplication of efforts in obtaining information (29 U.S.C.
657).
    The HAZWOPER Standard specifies a number of collection of
information (paperwork) requirements. Employers can use the information
collected under the HAZWOPER rule to develop the various programs the
Standard requires and to ensure that their workers are trained properly
about the safety and health hazards associated with hazardous waste
operations and emergency response to hazardous waste releases. OSHA
will use the records developed in response to this Standard to
determine adequate compliance with the Standard's safety and health
provisions. The employer's failure to collect and distribute the
information required in this standard will affect significantly OSHA's
effort to control and reduce injuries and fatalities. Such failure
would also be contrary to the direction Congress provided in The
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA).

II. Special Issues for Comment

    OSHA has a particular interest in comments on the following issues:
     Whether the proposed information collection requirements
are necessary for the proper performance of the Agency's functions,
including whether the information is useful;
     The accuracy of OSHA's estimate of the burden (time and
costs) of the information collection requirements, including the
validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
     The quality, utility, and clarity of the information
collected; and
     Ways to minimize the burden on employers who must comply;
for example, by using automated or other technological information
collection and transmission techniques.

III. Proposed Actions

    OSHA is requesting that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
extend the approval of the collection of information (paperwork)
requirements contained in the standard on Hazardous Waste Operations
and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER) (29 CFR 1910.120). The Agency is
requesting an adjustment decrease of 988 burden hours from the previous
submission (from 262,539 hours to 261,551 hours). This adjustment is
due primarily to a slight decline in the number of emergency response
organizations from 30,125 to 30,052 (a decline of 73 organizations).
    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.
    Title: Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER)
Standard (29 CFR 1910.120).
    OMB Control Number: 1218-0202.
    Affected Public: Businesses or other for-profits; Not-for-profit
organizations; Federal Government; State, Local, or Tribal Government.
    Number of Respondents: 30,052.
    Frequency of Response: On occasion.
    Total Responses: 1,440,759.
    Average Time per Response: Time per response varies from one minute
(.02 hour) to maintain a certification record to 23 hours to prepare a
written safety and health program.
    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 261,551.
    Estimated Cost (Operation and Maintenance): $3,124,960.

IV. Public Participation--Submission of Comments on This Notice and
Internet Access to Comments and Submissions

    You may submit comments in response to this document as follows:
(1) Electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal; (2) by facsimile; or (3) by hard copy. All
comments, attachments, and other material must identify the Agency name
and the OSHA docket number for this ICR (Docket No. OSHA-2011-0862).
You may supplement electronic submissions by uploading document files
electronically. If you wish to mail additional materials in reference
to an electronic or facsimile submission, you must submit them to the
OSHA Docket Office (see the section of this notice titled ADDRESSES).
The additional materials must clearly identify your electronic comments
by your name, date, and the docket number so the Agency can attach them
to your comments.
    Because of security procedures, the use of regular mail may cause a
significant delay in the receipt of comments. For information about
security procedures concerning the delivery of materials by hand,
express delivery, messenger, or courier service, please contact the
OSHA Docket Office at<PHONE_NUMBER>, (TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>).
    Comments and submissions are posted without change at http://www.regulations.gov. Therefore, OSHA cautions commenters about
submitting personal information such as their social security number
and date of birth. Although all submissions are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index, some information (e.g., copyrighted
material) is not publicly available to read or download from this Web
site. All submissions, including copyrighted material, are available
for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office. Information on
using the http://www.regulations.gov Web site to submit comments and
access the docket is available at the Web site's ``User Tips'' link.
Contact the OSHA Docket Office for information about materials not
available from the Web site, and for assistance in using the Internet
to locate docket submissions.

V. Authority and Signature

    David Michaels, Ph.D., MPH, Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, directed the preparation of this
notice. The authority for this notice is the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506 et seq.) and Secretary of Labor's Order No. 1-2012
(77 FR 3912).

    Signed at Washington, DC, on August 13, 2015.
David Michaels,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2015-20470 Filed 8-18-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 139 (Tuesday, July 21, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43148-43150]
[FR Doc No: 2015-17779]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-75454; File No. SR-MSRB-2015-05]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Municipal Securities Rulemaking
Board; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule
Change Consisting of an Amendment to MSRB Rule G-45, on Reporting of
Information on Municipal Fund Securities

July 15, 2015.
    Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on June 30, 2015, the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (the
``MSRB'' or ``Board'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as
described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by
the MSRB. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments
on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The MSRB filed with the Commission a proposed rule change
consisting of an amendment to MSRB Rule G-45, on reporting of
information on municipal fund securities (``proposed rule change'').
The proposed rule change would delay by 60 days, until October 28,
2015, the date on which the first submissions must be made pursuant to
Rule G-45. The first submissions on Form G-45 currently are due August
29, 2015. The MSRB proposes an immediate effectiveness for the proposed
rule change. The proposed rule change would extend by 60 days the due
date under a previously approved rule for the first submissions on Form
G-45.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the MSRB's Web
site at www.msrb.org/Rules-and-Interpretations/SEC-Filings/2015-Filings.aspx, at the MSRB's principal office, and at the Commission's
Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the MSRB included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the

proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The MSRB has prepared summaries,
set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant
aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The MSRB proposes to extend by 60 days until October 28, 2015 the
date the first submissions are due under Rule G-45 on Form G-45. On
February 21, 2014, the Commission approved the adoption of Rule G-45,
on reporting of municipal fund securities, and electronic Form G-45, as
well as associated amendments to Rules G-8, on books and records, and
G-9, on preservation of records.\3\ The effective date for that rule
change was February 24, 2015. The first submissions under Rule G-45 are
due August 29, 2015, which is 60 days from the end of the first
reporting period of January 1-June 30, 2015. The purpose of Rule G-45
is to enable the MSRB to collect reliable information about 529 college
savings plans (``529 plans'') solely for regulatory purposes and to
analyze that information to better understand the market and the manner
in which assets are invested.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Exchange Act Release No. 71598 (Feb. 21, 2014), 79 FR 11161
(Feb. 27, 2014) (SR-MSRB-2013-04).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    After the SEC's approval of Rule G-45 and Form G-45, MSRB staff
formed an industry User Group to develop the Form G-45 User's Manual
(the ``manual''), which the rule specifies would include technical
specifications for the Form, such as data entry. User Group members
include representatives from twelve different industry organizations
ranging from organizations that are involved in the distribution of
multiple 529 plans to those that participate in the distribution of
interests in only one plan. The range of expertise of User Group
members includes data services provision and program management.
    The User Group recommended that underwriters be afforded two
methods of submitting data to the MSRB on Form G-45--manual submissions
through the MSRB's Electronic Municipal Market Access Web site
(``EMMA[supreg]'') \4\ dataport web user interface and automated
submissions through a computer-to-computer (``B2B'') interface. MSRB
staff was responsive to those recommendations, and developed the two
interfaces.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ EMMA is a registered trademark of the MSRB.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In February 2015, the MSRB released the manual and opened a beta
test environment to assist underwriters with their submissions. Since
that time, underwriters and industry trade groups have discussed with
MSRB staff the challenges that underwriters are facing with programming
the data for submission to the Board on Form G-45. Their concerns
center on the ability to program automated B2B submissions,
particularly information about investment options in 529 plans.
    529 plans typically offer numerous investment options with multiple
underlying mutual funds. To gather adequate information about 529
plans, Form G-45 requires detailed data about the various investment
options available in 529 plans. The MSRB understands that the
programming of such information for a Form G-45 submission is
particularly challenging for underwriters because the required data
must be collected from multiple computer systems. While the programmers
for underwriters may be challenged by meeting the unextended deadline
for the first filings on Form G-45, after the first B2B filing, the
process would be automated and is expected to become more routine.
    To help ensure that the MSRB receives reliable, complete and
accurate filings on Form G-45 and to mitigate the burdens imposed on
underwriters that are making their first submission under Rule G-45,
the MSRB submits this proposed rule change to extend the date that the
first submissions on Form G-45 are due by 60 days, until October 28,
2015. The proposed rule change would double the time allowed for
underwriters to make their first submissions. The MSRB believes that
the extension will provide underwriters with sufficient time to submit
complete and accurate filings.\5\ Subsequent Form G-45 filings would
remain due 60 days from the end of each semi-annual reporting period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Representatives of industry trade associations have
suggested that the MSRB implement a one-year pilot period for
submissions. According to those associations, this would allow
underwriters sufficient time to work through any difficulties in the
programming and data collection while not being subject to potential
enforcement actions. The MSRB, however, believes that filings on
Form G-45 must remain fully subject to MSRB rules and all other
applicable federal securities laws, rules and regulations, and that
a full year would be an excessive delay in the MSRB's gathering of
reliable information about 529 plans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The MSRB believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with
section 15B(b)(2)(C) of the Act,\6\ which provides that the MSRB's
rules shall:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-4(b)(2)(C).

Be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to
foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in
regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect
to, and facilitating transactions in municipal securities and
municipal financial products, to remove impediments to and perfect
the mechanism of a free and open market in municipal securities and
municipal financial products, and, in general, to protect investors,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
municipal entities, obligated persons, and the public interest.

    In response to industry concerns about the ability to submit
reliable, accurate and complete data on a timely basis, the proposed
rule change would extend the date that the first submissions are due
under a previously approved rule.

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

    Section 15B(b)(2)(C) of the Act \7\ requires that MSRB rules be
designed not to impose any burden on competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The MSRB does
not believe that the proposed rule change would impose any burden on
competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the Act. The
proposed rule change would extend the date that the first submissions
on Form G-45 are due by 60 days from August 29, 2015 until October 28,
2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received on the
proposed rule change.

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

    Pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) \8\ of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
\9\ thereunder, the MSRB has designated the proposed rule change as one
that effects a change that: (i) Does not significantly affect the
protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) does not impose
any significant burden on competition; and (iii) by its terms, does not
become operative for 30 days after the date of the filing, or such
shorter time as the Commission may designate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).

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

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally does
not become operative until 30 days after the date of filing.\10\
However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \11\ permits the Commission to designate
a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest.\12\ The MSRB has requested that the
Commission designate the proposed rule change operative upon
filing,\13\ as specified in Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\14\ which would make
the proposed rule change operative on June 30, 2015. The MSRB has
stated that an earlier operative date would provide underwriters with
certainty regarding the due date of their first submission on Form G-
45.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Id.
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \12\ In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) requires a self-
regulatory organization to give the Commission written notice of its
intent to file a proposed rule change, along with a brief
description and text of such proposed rule change, at least five
business days prior to the date of filing, or such shorter time as
designated by the Commission. The MSRB satisfied this requirement on
June 23, 2015.
    \13\ See SR-MSRB-2015-05.
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \15\ See supra note 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission hereby grants the MSRB's request and believes that
designating the proposed rule change operative upon filing is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public
interest.\16\ According to the MSRB, Rule G-45 is designed to enable
the MSRB to collect reliable information about 529 plans solely for
regulatory purposes and to analyze that information to better
understand the market and the manner in which assets are invested.\17\
The Commission believes that designating the proposed rule change
operative upon filing is consistent with the protection of investors
and the public interest because it will provide underwriters with
certainty regarding the due date of their initial Form G-45 submission,
as well as help ensure that the MSRB receives reliable, complete and
accurate filings on Form G-45. In addition, the proposed rule change is
not making any substantive changes to MSRB rules; it is only extending
the deadline under Rule G-45 for initial submissions of Form G-45 by 60
days, until October 28, 2015. Therefore, the Commission hereby
designates the proposed rule change operative upon filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ For the purposes only of accelerating the operative date of
this proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule
change's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation.
See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \17\ See supra Section II.A.I.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-MSRB-2015-05 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-MSRB-2015-05. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the MSRB. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-MSRB-2015-05 and should be
submitted on or before August 11, 2015.

    For the Commission, pursuant to delegated authority.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-17779 Filed 7-20-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 116 (Thursday, June 16, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 36274-36276]
[FR Doc No: 2022-12935]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2020-1105; Project Identifier AD-2020-01459-T]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to remove Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2020-
25-03, which applies to all Airbus SAS Model A318, A319, A320, and A321
series airplanes. AD 2020-25-03 requires repetitive checks of the
pressure gauges on the inflation reservoir of each emergency escape
slide/raft to determine the amount of pressure, and applicable
corrective actions. AD 2020-25-03 also provides optional terminating
action for the repetitive checks. AD 2020-25-03 is no longer necessary
because the unsafe condition no longer exists. Accordingly, the FAA
proposes to remove AD 2020-25-03.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by August 1,
2022.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR

11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-1105; or in person at
Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, any
comments received, and other information. The street address for Docket
Operations is listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, Large
Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, FAA, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2020-1105; Project Identifier
AD-2020-01459-T'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
the proposal because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact received about this proposed AD.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Dan
Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, International
Validation Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198;
telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected]. Any
commentary that the FAA receives that is not specifically designated as
CBI will be placed in the public docket for this rulemaking.

Background

    EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, previously issued AD 2020-0236, dated October 27, 2020
(EASA AD 2020-0236) (also referred to as the Mandatory Continuing
Airworthiness Information, or the MCAI), to correct an unsafe condition
for all Airbus SAS Model A318 series airplanes; Model A319-111, -112, -
113, -114, -115, -131, -132, -133, -151N, -153N, and -171N airplanes;
Model A320-211, -212, -214, -215, -216, -231, -232, -233, -251N, -252N,
-253N, -271N, -272N, and -273N airplanes; and Model A321 series
airplanes.
    The FAA issued corresponding AD 2020-25-03, Amendment 39-21345 (85
FR 79415, December 10, 2020) (AD 2020-25-03), for those airplanes
except for Model A319-153N and A320-215 airplanes, which are not
included on the U.S. type certificate data sheet. AD 2020-25-03
requires repetitive checks of the pressure gauges on the inflation
reservoir of each emergency escape slide/raft to determine the amount
of pressure, and applicable corrective actions. AD 2020-25-03 also
provides optional terminating action for the repetitive checks. AD
2020-25-03 was prompted by a report of a loud bang heard during
airplane boarding. A subsequent inspection revealed that one emergency
escape slide/raft was found with zero reservoir pressure due to a burst
rupture disk assembly in the inflation reservoir, which was probably
caused by a manufacturing defect. The FAA issued AD 2020-25-03 to
address insufficient reservoir pressure in an emergency escape slide/
raft, which would prevent the deployment of the emergency escape slide/
raft during an emergency, possibly resulting in injury to the
occupants.

Actions Since AD 2020-25-03 Was Issued

    Since the FAA issued AD 2020-25-03, EASA issued AD 2020-0236-CN,
dated May 16, 2022, to cancel EASA AD 2020-0236. EASA has advised the
FAA that SAFRAN Aerosystems, the manufacturer of the affected parts,
produced service information with instructions for replacement of the
rupture disk during overhaul of the affected parts. EASA reports that
no rupture disk failures have occurred in service or during overhaul.
Consequently, new risk analysis determined that an unsafe condition no
longer exists that would warrant AD action.
    On March 16, 2022, the FAA issued Special Airworthiness Information
Bulletin (SAIB) 2022-06 to recommend replacement of the affected parts
during overhaul.

FAA's Conclusions

    Upon further consideration, the FAA has determined that AD 2020-25-
03 is no longer appropriate. Accordingly, this proposed AD would remove
AD 2020-25-03. Removal of AD 2020-25-03 would not preclude the FAA from
issuing another related action or commit the FAA to any course of
action in the future.

Related Costs of Compliance

    This proposed AD would add no cost. This proposed AD would remove
AD 2020-25-03 from 14 CFR part 39; therefore, operators would no longer
be required to show compliance with that AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, General requirements.
Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight
of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for
practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds

necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the
scope of that authority.

Regulatory Findings

    The FAA has determined that this proposed AD would not have
federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD
would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Would not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Would not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13   [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by:
0
a. Removing Airworthiness Directive AD 2020-25-03, Amendment 39-21345
(85 FR 79415, December 10, 2020), and
0
b. Adding the following new airworthiness directive:

Airbus SAS: Docket No. FAA-2020-1105; Project Identifier AD-2020-
01459-T.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by August 1,
2022.

(b) Affected Airworthiness Directive (AD)

    This AD replaces AD 2020-25-03, Amendment 39-21345 (85 FR 79415,
December 10, 2020).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Airbus SAS airplanes, certificated in any
category, identified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) of this AD.
    (1) Model A318-111, -112, -121, and -122 airplanes.
    (2) Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, -133, -
151N, and -171N airplanes.
    (3) Model A320-211, -212, -214, -216, -231, -232, -233, -251N, -
252N, -253N, -271N, -272N, and -273N airplanes.
    (4) Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, -232, -
251N, -252N, -253N, -271N, -272N, -251NX, -252NX, -253NX, -271NX,
and -272NX airplanes.

(d) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Dan Rodina,
Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, International Validation
Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone
and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].

    Issued on June 10, 2022.
Christina Underwood,
Acting Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-12935 Filed 6-15-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P