[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 100 (Wednesday, May 23, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 23810-23812]
[FR Doc No: 2018-11072]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2018-0270]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; North Atlantic Ocean, Ocean City, MD

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for
certain waters of the North Atlantic Ocean adjacent to Ocean City, MD.
This action is necessary to provide for the safety of life on the
navigable waters during an air show on May 23, 2018. This action will
prohibit persons and vessels from entering the safety zone unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port Maryland-National Capital Region
or a designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 1:30 p.m. to 4 p.m. on May 23, 2018.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2018-0270 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Mr. Ronald Houck, Sector Maryland-National Capital Region
Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 410-576-
2674, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

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

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    On February 21, 2018, the Town of Ocean City, MD notified the Coast
Guard that from 2 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. on May 23, 2018, it will be
conducting the Canadian Snowbirds Air Show Featurette above the North
Atlantic Ocean adjacent to Ocean City, MD. In response, on April 16,
2018, the Coast Guard published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
titled ``Safety Zone; North Atlantic Ocean, Ocean City, MD'' (83 FR
16265). There we stated why we issued the NPRM, and invited comments on
our proposed regulatory action related to this fireworks display.
During the comment period that ended May 16, 2018, we received no
comments.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of
this rule would be contrary to public interest because immediate action
is needed to respond to the potential safety hazards associated with an
air show.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C.
1231. The Captain of the Port Maryland-National Capital Region (COTP)
has determined that potential hazards associated with this May 23, 2018
air show will be a safety concern for anyone operating within certain
waters of the North Atlantic Ocean adjacent to Ocean City, MD. The
purpose of this rule is to ensure the safety of vessels and the
navigable waters in the safety zone before, during, and after the
scheduled event.

IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes, and the Rule

    As noted above, we received no comments on our NPRM published April
16, 2018. Therefore, there are no substantive changes in the regulatory
text of this rule from the proposed rule in the NPRM.
    This rule establishes a safety zone from 1:30 p.m. to 4 p.m. on May
23, 2018. The safety zone will cover all waters of the North Atlantic
Ocean, within an area bounded by the following coordinates: commencing
at a point near the shoreline at latitude 38[deg]20'33.3'' N, longitude
075[deg]04'37.7'' W, thence eastward to latitude 38[deg]20'24.9'' N,
longitude 075[deg]04'01.5'' W, thence southward to latitude
38[deg]19'18.4'' N, longitude 075[deg]04'26.9'' W, thence westward to
latitude 38[deg]19'27.0'' N, longitude 075[deg]05'03.0'' W, thence
northward to point of origin, located adjacent to Ocean City, MD. The
duration of the zone is intended to ensure the safety of life on these
navigable waters before, during, and after the scheduled 2 p.m. air
show. No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the safety zone
without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated
representative.

V. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This rule has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
duration, and time-of-day of the safety zone. Vessel traffic will be
able to safely transit around this safety zone, which would impact a
small designated area for less than 3 hours during a Wednesday before
Memorial Day when vessel traffic in the North Atlantic Ocean is
normally low. The Coast Guard will issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners
via VHF-FM marine band radio channel 16 to provide information about
the safety zone.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard received no comments from the Small Business
Administration on this rulemaking. The Coast Guard certifies under 5
U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any
vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

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

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

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

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, which guide the
Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is
one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively
have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves
a safety zone lasting less than three hours that would prohibit vessel
movement within a portion of the North Atlantic Ocean. It is
categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L60(a) of
Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 01. A
Record of Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is
available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.

G. Protest Activities

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

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-
1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1

0
2. Add Sec.  [thinsp]165.T05-0270 to read as follows:

Sec.  [thinsp]165.T05-0270  Safety Zone; North Atlantic Ocean, Ocean
City, MD

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All waters of
the North Atlantic Ocean, within an area bounded by the following
coordinates: Commencing at a point near the shoreline at latitude
38[deg]20'33.3'' N, longitude 075[deg]04'37.7'' W, thence eastward to
latitude 38[deg]20'24.9'' N, longitude 075[deg]04'01.5'' W, thence
southward to latitude 38[deg]19'18.4'' N, longitude 075[deg]04'26.9''
W, thence westward to latitude 38[deg]19'27.0'' N, longitude
075[deg]05'03.0'' W, thence northward to point of origin, located
adjacent to Ocean City, MD. All coordinates refer to datum NAD 1983.
    (b) Definitions. As used in this section:
    (1) Captain of the Port Maryland-National Capital Region means the
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Maryland-National Capital Region.
    (2) Designated representative means any Coast Guard commissioned,
warrant, or petty officer who has been authorized by the Captain of the
Port Maryland-National Capital Region to assist in enforcement of the
safety zone described in paragraph (a) of this section.
    (c) Regulations. The general safety zone regulations found in 33
CFR part 165, subpart C apply to the safety zone created by this
section.
    (1) All persons are required to comply with the general regulations
governing safety zones found in 33 CFR 165.23.
    (2) Entry into or remaining in this safety zone is prohibited
unless authorized by the Coast Guard Captain of the Port Maryland-
National Capital Region. All vessels underway within this safety zone
at the time it is implemented are to depart the zone.
    (3) Persons desiring to transit the area of the safety zone are to
obtain authorization from the Captain of the Port Maryland-National
Capital Region or designated representative. To request permission to
transit the area, the Captain of the Port Maryland-National Capital
Region and or designated representatives can be contacted at telephone
number<PHONE_NUMBER> or on marine band radio VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8
MHz). The Coast Guard vessels enforcing this section can be contacted
on marine band radio VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz). Upon being hailed
by a U.S. Coast Guard vessel, or other Federal, State, or local agency
vessel, by siren, radio, flashing light, or other means, the operator
of a vessel shall proceed as directed. If permission is granted to
enter the safety zone, all persons and vessels must comply with the
instructions of the Captain of the Port Maryland-National Capital
Region or designated representative and proceed as directed while
within the zone.
    (4) Enforcement officials. The U.S. Coast Guard may be assisted in
the patrol and enforcement of the zone by Federal, State, and local
agencies.
    (d) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 1:30
p.m. to 4 p.m. on May 23, 2018.

    Dated: May 18, 2018.
Joseph B. Loring,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Maryland-National
Capital Region.
[FR Doc. 2018-11072 Filed 5-22-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: October 22, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 204)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 65227-65228]
[DOCID:fr22oc10-8]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0603; Airspace Docket No. 10-ASW-9]

Revocation of Class E Airspace; Franklin, TX

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action removes Class E airspace for Franklin, TX.
Abandonment of the former Rocking 7 Ranch Airport and cancellation of
all Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAP) has eliminated the
need for controlled airspace in the Franklin, TX, area. The FAA is
taking this action to ensure the efficient use of airspace within the
National Airspace System.

DATES: Effective date: 0901 UTC, January 13, 2011. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
1 CFR Part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and
publication of conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Enander, Central Service Center,
Operations Support Group, Federal Aviation Administration, Southwest
Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76137; telephone (817) 321-
7716.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On June 28, 2010, the FAA published in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking to remove Class E airspace for Franklin,
TX (75 FR 36586) Docket No. FAA-2010-0603. Interested parties were
invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written
comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received. Class E
airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of FAA Order
7400.9U dated August 18, 2010, and effective September 15, 2010, which
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace
designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in
the Order.

The Rule

    This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
Part 71 by removing the Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface at the former Rocking 7 Ranch Airport, Franklin, TX.
The airport has been abandoned and all SIAPs have been cancelled,
therefore, controlled airspace is no longer needed for IFR operations.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
Therefore, this regulation: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory
action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule''
under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106, describes
the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation
Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority.
This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it removes controlled airspace at Rocking 7 Ranch Airport, Franklin,
TX.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (Air).

Adoption of the Amendment

0
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration
amends 14 CFR Part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR Part 71 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E. O. 10854,
24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of the Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9U, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 18, 2010, and effective September 15,
2010 is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas extending upward from 700
feet or more above the surface.

* * * * *

ASW TX E5 Franklin, TX [Removed]

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas on October 7, 2010.
Anthony D. Roetzel,
Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2010-26532 Filed 10-21-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: August 5, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 150)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 47194-47197]
[DOCID:fr05au10-8]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0046; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-086-AD;
Amendment 39-16383; AD 2010-16-06]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Model 737-300, -400,
-500, -600, -700, and -800 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Model 737-300, -400, -500, -600, -700, and -800 series airplanes. This
AD requires inspecting to verify the part number of the low-pressure
flex-hoses of the crew oxygen system installed under the oxygen mask
stowage boxes located within the flight deck, and replacing the flex-
hose with a new non-conductive low-pressure flex-hose if necessary.
This AD results from reports of low-pressure flex-hoses of the crew
oxygen system that burned through due to inadvertent electrical current
from a short circuit in the audio select panel. We are issuing this AD
to prevent inadvertent electrical current, which can cause the low-
pressure flex-hoses of the crew oxygen system to melt or burn, causing
oxygen system leakage and smoke or fire.

DATES: This AD is effective September 9, 2010.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in the AD as of September 9,
2010.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone 206-
544-5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; 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 AD, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The address for the
Docket Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is the Document Management
Facility,

U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan L. Monroe, Aerospace Engineer,
Cabin Safety and Environmental Systems Branch, ANM-150S, FAA, Seattle
Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an airworthiness directive (AD) that would apply to
certain Model 737-300, -400, -500, -600, -700, and -800 series
airplanes. That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on January
22, 2010 (75 FR 3662). That NPRM proposed to require inspecting to
verify the part number of the low-pressure flex-hoses of the crew
oxygen system installed under the oxygen mask stowage boxes located
within the flight deck, and replacing the flex-hose with a new non-
conductive low-pressure flex-hose if necessary.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We considered the comments received.

Support of NPRM

    Boeing concurs with the contents of the NPRM.

Request for Clarification of Cup-Type Oxygen Mask Applicability

    All Nippon Airways requests that the FAA clarify the NPRM by
including a note stating that the cup-type oxygen mask at the observer
seat position is not included in the applicability statement of the
NPRM, as stated in a note in the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Service Bulletin 737-35A1053, Revision 1, dated June 1, 2000.
    We agree that clarification is necessary. Boeing Service Bulletin
737-35A1053, Revision 1, dated June 1, 2000, provides information that
describes the applicable parts and equipment. ADs do not identify parts
and equipment that are not applicable; therefore, the cup-type oxygen
mask is not included in the applicability statement. No change has been
made to the AD in this regard.

Request To Extend Compliance Time

    The Air Transport Association on behalf of its member American
Airlines, requests that the 36-month compliance time be extended to 72
months to allow accomplishment during heavy maintenance. American
Airlines states that this extended compliance time would be consistent
with the apparent urgency being placed on this inspection by the FAA,
which has waited over ten years since the original release of the
service bulletin to issue the NPRM. American Airlines also states that
the compliance urgency should also take into account that the proposed
AD results from reports of hoses that burned through on a Model 757
airplane due to electrical current from a short circuit in the audio
selector panel with no mention of reports of burned-through hoses on
properly maintained Model 737 airplanes.
    We do not agree. American Airlines provides no technical
justification for extending the compliance time. In developing an
appropriate compliance time, we considered the safety implications,
parts availability, and normal maintenance schedules for timely
accomplishment of the required actions. Further, we arrived at the
compliance time with manufacturer concurrence. In consideration of all
of these factors, we determined that the compliance time, as proposed,
represents an appropriate interval in which the inspections can be done
in a timely manner within the fleet, while still maintaining an
adequate level of safety. If additional data are presented that would
justify a longer compliance time, we may consider further rulemaking on
this issue. No change has been made to the AD in this regard.

Request for Clarification of Conductive Oxygen Hose Part Numbers

    The Air Transport Association on behalf of its member American
Airlines, requests clarification regarding the conductive oxygen hose
part numbers in Table 1 of the NPRM and the applicable airplane models.
American Airlines states that the NPRM requires inspections for five
conductive hose part numbers regardless of model applicability, and
does not differentiate between part numbers that are applicable to
Model 737-300, -400, and -500 series airplanes, and those applicable to
Models 737-600, -700, and -800 series airplanes. American Airlines
states that if an operator who flies only Model 737-800 series
airplanes has accomplished Boeing Service Bulletin 737-35A1058,
Revision 1, dated June 1, 2000, for Model 737-800 airplanes prior to
the effective date of the NPRM, the operator would now be required to
perform another inspection to look for the part numbers in Boeing
Service Bulletin 737-35A1053, Revision 1, dated June 1, 2000, which
does not apply to Model 737-800 airplanes. American Airlines asserts
that this places undue burden and expense on the operator.
    We agree that clarification is needed regarding the conductive hose
part numbers. We have changed Table 1 of this final rule to identify
part numbers for only Model 737-300, -400, and -500 series airplanes.
Table 2 has been added to this final rule to identify part numbers for
Model 737-600, -700, and -800 series airplanes.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
the AD with the changes described previously. We also determined that
these changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or
increase the scope of the AD.

Explanation of Change to Costs of Compliance

    Since issuance of the NPRM, we have increased the labor rate used
in the Costs of Compliance from $80 per work-hour to $85 per work-hour.
The Costs of Compliance information, below, reflects this increase in
the specified hourly labor rate.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 851 airplanes of U.S.
registry. We also estimate that it will take 1 work-hour per product to
comply with this AD. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Based
on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD to the U.S. operators
to be $72,335, or $85 per product.

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

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979), and
    (3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    You can find our regulatory evaluation and the estimated costs of
compliance in the AD Docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2010-16-06 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-16383. Docket No. FAA-
2010-0046; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-086-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective September 9,
2010.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to the airplanes identified in paragraphs
(c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD, certificated in any category.
    (1) The Boeing Company Model 737-300, -400, and -500 series
airplanes, as identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 737-35A1053,
Revision 1, dated June 1, 2000.
    (2) The Boeing Company Model 737-600, -700, and -800 series
airplanes, as identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 737-35A1058,
Revision 1, dated June 1, 2000.

Subject

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

Unsafe Condition

    (e) This AD results from reports of low-pressure flex-hoses of
the crew oxygen system that burned through due to inadvertent
electrical current from a short circuit in the audio select panel.
The Federal Aviation Administration is issuing this AD to prevent
inadvertent electrical current, which can cause the low-pressure
flex-hoses of the crew oxygen system to melt or burn, resulting in
oxygen system leakage and smoke or fire.

Compliance

    (f) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.

Inspection and Replacement

    (g) Within 36 months after the effective date of this AD, do an
inspection to determine whether any low-pressure flex-hose of the
crew oxygen system installed under the oxygen mask stowage box in
the flight deck has a part number identified in Table 1 or Table 2
of this AD, as applicable. A review of airplane maintenance records
is acceptable in lieu of this inspection if the part number of the
low-pressure flex-hoses of the crew oxygen system can be
conclusively determined from that review.
    (1) For any hose having a part number identified in Table 1 or
Table 2 of this AD, as applicable, before further flight, replace
the hose with a new or serviceable part, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 737-35A1053,
Revision 1, dated June 1, 2000; or Boeing Service Bulletin 737-
35A1058, Revision 1, dated June 1, 2000; as applicable.
    (2) For any hose not having a part number identified in Table 1
or Table 2 of this AD no further action is required by this
paragraph.

   Table 1--Applicable Part Numbers for Model 737-300, -400, and -500
                            Series Airplanes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Equivalent Boeing supplier part Nos.
  Boeing specification part No.  ---------------------------------------
                                    Puritan bennett        Hydraflow
------------------------------------------------------------------------
10-60174-31.....................  173470-31.........            37001-31
10-60174-35.....................  173470-35.........            37001-35
10-60174-46.....................  Not Applicable....            37001-46
60B50059-99.....................  Not Applicable....            38001-99
------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Table 2--Applicable Part Numbers for Model 737-600, -700, and -800
                            Series Airplanes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Equivalent Boeing supplier part Nos.
  Boeing specification part No.  ---------------------------------------
                                    Puritan bennett        Hydraflow
------------------------------------------------------------------------
10-60174-31.....................  173470-31.........            37001-31
10-60174-35.....................  173470-35.........            37001-35
60B50059-124....................  Not Applicable....           38001-124
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Parts Installation

    (h) As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install a
crew oxygen hose with a part number identified in Table 1 or Table 2
of this AD, as applicable, on any airplane.

Actions Accomplished According to Previous Issue of Service Bulletins

    (i) Actions accomplished before the effective date of this AD in
accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-35A1053, dated
September 2, 1999; or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-35A1058,
dated September 2, 1999; as applicable; are considered acceptable
for compliance with the corresponding actions specified in this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (j)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the

authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to Attn: Susan L.
Monroe, Aerospace Engineer, Cabin Safety and Environmental Systems
Branch, ANM-150S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601
Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425) 917-
6457; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Or, e-mail information to 9-ANM-Seattle-
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or
principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a
principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office.
The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (k) You must use Boeing Service Bulletin 737-35A1053, Revision
1, dated June 1, 2000; or Boeing Service Bulletin 737-35A1058,
Revision 1, dated June 1, 2000; as applicable; to do the actions
required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone
206-544-5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (3) You may review copies of the service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the service information that
is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://
www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 16, 2010.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-18624 Filed 8-4-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 238 (Tuesday, December 13, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 76222-76225]
[FR Doc No: 2022-26950]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-96460; File No. SR-IEX-2022-12]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Investors Exchange LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Supplementary Material .15 of IEX Rule 5.110 (Supervision) To Extend
the Temporary Remote Inspection Relief to IEX Members for Calendar Year
2022

December 7, 2022.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby given
that, on November 30, 2022, the Investors Exchange LLC (``IEX'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by IEX. IEX has
designated the proposed rule change as constituting a ``non-
controversial'' rule change under Section 19(b)(3)(A) \4\ of the Act
and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \5\ thereunder, which renders the proposal
effective upon receipt of this filing by the Commission. The Commission
is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule
change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \5\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).

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

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

    Pursuant to the provisions of Section 19(b)(1) under the Act,\6\
and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\7\ the Exchange is filing with the
Commission a proposed rule change to amend Supplementary Material .15
of IEX Rule 5.110 (Supervision) to extend the temporary remote
inspection relief to IEX Members for calendar year 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \7\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
website at www.iextrading.com, at the principal office of the Exchange,
and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization
included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the
proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of these statement may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The self-regulatory organization
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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The COVID-19 pandemic has caused a host of operational disruptions
to the securities industry and impacted IEX Members,\8\ regulators,
investors, and other stakeholders. In response to the pandemic, IEX,
adopted Supplementary Material .15 of IEX Rule 5.110 to provide Members
the temporary option of satisfying their inspection obligations for
offices of supervisory jurisdiction, branch offices, or non-branch
locations under IEX Rule 5.110 (Supervision) remotely for calendar year
2021, subject to specified conditions,\9\ due to the logistical
challenges of going on-site while public health and safety concerns
related to COVID-19 persisted. While there are several signs that the
pandemic has receded, much uncertainty still remains. The emergence of
new variants, dissimilar vaccination rates throughout the U.S., and
varying levels of transmissions of the virus all indicate that COVID-19
remains an active and real public health concern. Against this setting,
IEX understands the complexity Members face in assessing when and how
to effectively and safely recall their employees back into offices
alongside fashioning permanent telework arrangements or a hybrid
workforce model in which some employees may work on-site in a
commercial office space and other employees may work off-site in an
alternative location (e.g., a personal residence).\10\ Accordingly, due
to the continued logistical challenges of going on-site to branch
offices or locations while these public health and safety concerns
related to COVID-19 persist coupled with several Members delaying their
return-to-office plans, IEX believes that extending the temporary
remote inspection relief to Members through calendar year 2022
represents a prudent accommodation.\11\ IEX also makes this proposed
rule change to conform its rules with those of FINRA, which has
extended the same temporary remote inspection relief to all FINRA
member firms through December 31, 2022.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See IEX Rule 1.160(s).
    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 92222 (June 22,
2021), 86 FR 34069 (June 28, 2021) (SR-IEX-2021-09) (providing
remote inspection relief to Members for calendar year 2021).
    \10\ For example, IEX understands that both the Commission and
FINRA do not currently require employees to return to the office.
See SEC Fiscal Year 2022 Agency Financial Report, available at
https://www.sec.gov/files/sec-2022-agency-financial-report.pdf and
https://www.finra.org/rules-guidance/key-topics/covid-19.
    \11\ The proposed rule change will automatically sunset on
December 31, 2022. IEX will submit a separate rule filing if it
seeks to extend the duration of the temporary proposed rule beyond
December 31, 2022.
    \12\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 94018 (January 20,
2022), 87 FR 4072 (January 26, 2022) (SR-FINRA-2022-001).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This proposed extension would provide further clarity to Members on
regulatory requirements and account for time needed for many Members to
carefully assess when and how to have their employees safely return to
their offices considering vaccination coverage in the U.S. and
transmission levels of the virus, including any emergent variants
throughout the country.
    The proposed amendment would provide that Members have the option
to conduct remotely those inspections described in Supplementary
Material .15 to IEX Rule 5.110 through the end of 2022. IEX is not
proposing to amend the other conditions of the temporary relief in
Supplementary Material .15 of IEX Rule 5.110. The current conditions of
Supplementary Material .15 of IEX Rule 5.110 for Members that elect to
conduct remote inspections would remain unchanged: such firms must
still amend or supplement their written supervisory procedures for
remote inspections, use remote inspections as part of an effective
supervisory system, and maintain the required documentation. The
additional period of time would also allow IEX to further monitor the
effectiveness of remote inspections and their impacts--positive or
negative--on Members' overall supervisory systems in the evolving
workplace.
    IEX continues to believe this temporary remote inspection option is
a reasonable alternative to provide to Members to fulfill their IEX
Rule 5.110 obligations during the ongoing pandemic, and is designed to
achieve the investor protection objectives of the inspection
requirements under these unique circumstances. Members should consider
whether, under their particular operating conditions, reliance on
remote inspections would be reasonable under the circumstances. For
example, Members with offices that are open to the public or that are
otherwise doing business as usual should consider whether some form of
in-person inspections would be feasible and appropriately contribute to
a supervisory system that is reasonably designed to achieve compliance
with applicable securities laws and regulations, and with applicable
IEX rules.
    IEX has filed the proposed rule change for immediate effectiveness
and has requested that the SEC waive the requirement that the proposed
rule change not become operative for 30 days after the date of the
filing, so IEX can implement the proposed rule change immediately.
2. Statutory Basis
    IEX believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 6(b) \13\ of the Act in general, and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \14\ in particular, in that it
is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices,
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. The Exchange's rule proposal is intended to harmonize
IEX's supervision rules, specifically with respect to the requirements
for inspections of Members' branch offices and other locations, with
those of FINRA, on which they are based. Consequently, the

proposed change will conform the Exchange's rules to changes made to
corresponding FINRA rules, thus promoting application of consistent
regulatory standards with respect to rules that FINRA enforces pursuant
to its regulatory services agreement with the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In recognition of the impact of COVID-19 on performing on-site
inspections, the proposed rule change is intended to provide firms a
temporary regulatory option to conduct inspections of offices and
locations remotely for calendar year 2022 inspections. This proposed
supplementary material does not relieve firms from meeting the core
regulatory obligation to establish and maintain a system to supervise
the activities of each associated person that is reasonably designed to
achieve compliance with applicable securities laws and regulations, and
with applicable IEX rules that directly serve investor protection. In a
time when faced with unique challenges resulting from the COVID-19
pandemic, IEX believes that the proposed rule change provides sensibly
tailored relief that will afford firms the ability to observe the
recommendations of public health officials to provide for the health
and safety of their personnel, while continuing to serve and promote
the protection of investors and the public interest.

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

    IEX does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in
any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed rule change is not
designed to address any competitive issue but to align the Exchange's
rules with those of FINRA, which will assist FINRA in its oversight
work done pursuant to a regulatory services agreement with IEX. The
proposed rule change will also provide for consistent application of
the Exchange's supervision rules with those of FINRA, on which they are
based. Consequently, the Exchange does not believe that the proposed
change implicates competition at all.

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

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

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

    The Exchange has designated this rule filing as non-controversial
under Section 19(b)(3)(A) \15\ of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \16\
thereunder. Because the proposed rule change does not: (i)
significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder. In addition, the Exchange provided the Commission
with written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change,
along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at
least five business days prior to the date of filing.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \17\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that this filing is non-controversial because
it raises no novel issues and is consistent with FINRA rules previously
approved by or filed with the Commission. In particular, the purpose of
the proposed rule change is to harmonize with and conform to FINRA
rules. The Exchange believes that the proposal promotes the protection
of investors as it will harmonize the Exchange's supervision rules with
those of FINRA, which will simplify the oversight process conducted by
FINRA pursuant to a regulatory services agreement with the Exchange.
Moreover, the Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change
implicates competition at all because the proposed change aligns the
Exchange's rules with those of FINRA, which will assist it in its
oversight work done pursuant to such regulatory services agreement.
    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \18\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\19\ the Commission
may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked
the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay to permit the
Exchange to harmonize its rules with FINRA, as described herein, upon
effectiveness of the proposed rule filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \19\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    IEX has indicated that extending the relief provided in SR-IEX-
2021-09 would provide assurances to its member firms that they can plan
their 2022 inspection program and conduct remote inspections for any
inspections to be conducted through calendar year 2022. Importantly,
extending the relief immediately upon filing and without a 30-day
operative delay would allow IEX's member firms to continue performing
their supervisory obligations, while addressing the ongoing impacts of
the COVID-19 pandemic. Moreover, like SR-IEX-2021-09, the proposed
extension would provide only temporary relief during the period in
which IEX's member firms' operations remain impacted by COVID-19. Thus,
the amended rules will revert back to their original state at the
conclusion of the temporary relief period and, if applicable, any
extension thereof. For these reasons, the Commission believes that
waiver of the 30-day operative delay for this proposed rule change is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest.
Accordingly, the Commission hereby waives the 30-day operative delay
and designates the proposed rule change operative upon filing.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule change's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \21\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or

     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-IEX-2022-12 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-IEX-2022-12. This file
number should be included in 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 website (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 website 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 will also be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of IEX and on its internet website
at www.iextrading.com. All comments received will be posted without
change. Persons submitting comments are cautioned that we do not redact
or edit personal identifying information from comment submissions. You
should submit only information that you wish to make available
publicly.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-IEX-2022-12 and
should be submitted on or before January 3, 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\22\
Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-26950 Filed 12-12-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


                        Fourth ESA Stakeholder Workshop
                                April 15, 2015
                            8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.

Rachel Carson Room at FWS, Skyline, Bldg. 7, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Bailey's Crossroads, VA

                                    AGENDA

8:30 am		Workshop opens
9:00 am		Opening Remarks 		Gina Shultz (FWS) and Don Brady (EPA)
9:15 am		Agency Update on Problem Formulations for Three ESA Pilot Chemicals:
      			Description of the Federal Action/Opportunities for Refinement - 				Melissa Panger and Eric Miederhoff (EPA)
      			Geospatial Data for Mapping Pesticide Use Patterns  -  Steven Lennartz
      											(EPA)
      			Species Range Data  -  Keith Paul (FWS)
      			Risk Hypothesis and Weight-of-the-Evidence Approach  -  Scott Hecht 												(NOAA)
12:30 pm		Lunch (not provided)
2:00 pm		Agency Update on Application of the Interim Scientific Approaches for Three 				ESA Pilot Chemicals:
      			Aquatic Example  -  (interagency)
      			Terrestrial Example  -  (interagency)
3:00  -  5:00 pm		Stakeholder Input & Presentations
5:00 pm 		Closing Remarks		Cathy Tortorici 	(NOAA)


From: Reeves, David Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2002 7: 51 AM To: ' blong@ quantegy. com' Cc: Vince Hellwig ( E mail) Subject: Mag Tape  Residual Risk Good morning. I got your voice message from last night and appreciate your taki ng the time to get the room dimensions for the fugitive emission points at your facility. I am attaching my write up of our earlier conversation and would appr eciate your reading it to confirm I have documented the information correctly.

Please feel free to provide the room dimensions via e mail or phone, whatever is most convenient for you. Thanks again for your time and we will keep you infor med concerning the status of the residual risk project.

Dave Reeves RTI International dwreeves@ rti. org ( 919) 316 3739


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 246 (Tuesday, December 26, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 60890-60894]
[FR Doc No: 2017-27805]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0258; FRL-9970-94]

2-Propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, dodecyl ester, polymer with 1-
ethenyl-2-pyrrolidinone and a-(2-methyl-1-oxo-2-propen-1-yl)-w-
methoxypoly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl); Tolerance Exemption

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance for residues of 2-propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, dodecyl
ester, polymer with 1-ethenyl-2-pyrrolidinone and a-(2-methyl-1-oxo-2-
propen-1-yl)-w-methoxypoly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl); when used as an inert
ingredient in a pesticide chemical formulation. Spring Trading Company
on behalf of Ashland Specialty Ingredients, submitted a petition to EPA
under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), requesting an
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. This regulation
eliminates the need to establish a maximum permissible level for
residues of 2-propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, dodecyl ester, polymer with 1-
ethenyl-2-pyrrolidinone and a-(2-methyl-1-oxo-2-propen-1-yl)-w-
methoxypoly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl) on food or feed commodities.

DATES: This regulation is effective December 26, 2017. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before February 26, 2018,
and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40
CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0258, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Please review the visitor instructions and
additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

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

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

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

C. Can I file an objection or hearing request?

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0258 in the subject line on the first
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must
be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before
February 26, 2018. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections
and hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for
inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without
prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing
request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0258, by one of
the following methods.
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. Background and Statutory Findings

    In the Federal Register of September 15, 2017 (82 FR 43352) (FRL-
9965-43), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408, 21
U.S.C. 346a, announcing the receipt of a pesticide petition (PP IN-
11045) filed by Spring Trading Company on behalf of Ashland Specialty
Ingredients, 203 Dogwood Trail Magnolia, Texas 77354. The petition
requested that 40 CFR 180.960 be amended by establishing an exemption
from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of 2-propenoic acid,
2-methyl-, dodecyl ester, polymer with 1-ethenyl-2-pyrrolidinone and a-
(2-methyl-1-oxo-2-propen-1-yl)-w-methoxypoly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl);
193743-10-1. That document included a summary of the petition prepared
by the petitioner and solicited comments on the petitioner's request.
The Agency did not receive any comments.
    Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish an
exemption from the requirement for a tolerance (the legal limit for a
pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA determines that
the exemption is ``safe.'' Section 408(c)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines
``safe'' to mean that ``there is a reasonable certainty that no harm
will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue,
including all anticipated dietary exposures and all other exposures for
which there is reliable information.'' This includes exposure through
drinking water and use in residential settings, but does not include
occupational exposure. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to
give special consideration to exposure of infants and children to the
pesticide chemical residue in establishing an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance and to ``ensure that there is a reasonable
certainty that no harm will result to infants and children from
aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue . . .'' and
specifies factors EPA is to consider in establishing an exemption.

III. Risk Assessment and Statutory Findings

    EPA establishes exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance only
in those cases where it can be shown that the risks from aggregate
exposure to pesticide chemical residues under reasonably foreseeable
circumstances will pose no appreciable risks to human health. In order
to determine the risks from aggregate exposure to pesticide inert
ingredients, the Agency considers the toxicity of the inert in
conjunction with possible exposure to residues of the inert ingredient
through food, drinking water, and through other exposures that occur as
a result of pesticide use in residential settings. If EPA is able to
determine that a finite tolerance is not necessary to ensure that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate
exposure to the inert ingredient, an exemption from the requirement of
a tolerance may be established.
    Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the
available scientific data and other relevant information in support of
this action and considered its validity, completeness and reliability
and the relationship of this information to human risk. EPA has also
considered available information concerning the variability of the
sensitivities of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including
infants and children. In the case of certain chemical substances that
are defined as polymers, the Agency has established a set of criteria
to identify categories of polymers expected to present minimal or no
risk. The definition of a polymer is given in 40 CFR 723.250(b) and the
exclusion criteria for identifying these low-risk polymers are
described in 40 CFR 723.250(d). 2-Propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, dodecyl
ester, polymer with 1-ethenyl-2-pyrrolidinone and a-(2-methyl-1-oxo-2-
propen-1-yl)-w-methoxypoly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl) conforms to the
definition of a polymer given in 40 CFR 723.250(b) and meets the
following criteria that are used to identify low-risk polymers.
    1. The polymer is not a cationic polymer nor is it reasonably
anticipated to become a cationic polymer in a natural aquatic
environment.
    2. The polymer does contain as an integral part of its composition
the atomic elements carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen.
    3. The polymer does not contain as an integral part of its
composition, except as impurities, any element other than those listed
in 40 CFR 723.250(d)(2)(ii).
    4. The polymer is neither designed nor can it be reasonably
anticipated to substantially degrade, decompose, or depolymerize.
    5. The polymer is manufactured or imported from monomers and/or
reactants that are already included on the TSCA Chemical Substance
Inventory or manufactured under an applicable TSCA section 5 exemption.
    6. The polymer is not a water absorbing polymer with a number
average molecular weight (MW) greater than or equal to 10,000 daltons.
    Additionally, the polymer also meets as required the following
exemption criteria specified in 40 CFR 723.250(e).
    7. The polymer's number average MW of 20,600 is greater than or
equal to 10,000 daltons. The polymer contains less than 2% oligomeric
material below MW 500 and less than 5% oligomeric material below MW
1,000.
    Thus, 2-propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, dodecyl ester, polymer with 1-
ethenyl-2-pyrrolidinone and a-(2-methyl-1-oxo-2-propen-1-yl)-w-
methoxypoly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl) meets the criteria for a polymer to be
considered low risk under 40 CFR 723.250. Based on its conformance to
the criteria in this unit, no mammalian toxicity is anticipated from
dietary, inhalation, or dermal exposure to 2-propenoic acid, 2-methyl-,
dodecyl ester, polymer with 1-ethenyl-2-pyrrolidinone and a-(2-methyl-
1-oxo-2-propen-1-yl)-w-methoxypoly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl).

IV. Aggregate Exposures

    For the purposes of assessing potential exposure under this
exemption, EPA considered that 2-propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, dodecyl
ester, polymer with 1-ethenyl-2-pyrrolidinone and a-(2-methyl-1-oxo-2-
propen-1-yl)-w-methoxypoly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl) could be present in all
raw and processed agricultural commodities and drinking water, and that
non-occupational non-dietary exposure was possible. The number average
MW of 2-propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, dodecyl ester, polymer with 1-
ethenyl-2-pyrrolidinone and a-(2-methyl-1-oxo-2-propen-1-yl)-w-
methoxypoly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl) is 20,600 daltons. Generally, a polymer
of this size would be poorly absorbed through the intact
gastrointestinal tract or through intact human skin. Since 2-propenoic
acid, 2-methyl-, dodecyl ester, polymer with 1-ethenyl-2-pyrrolidinone
and a-(2-methyl-1-oxo-2-propen-1-yl)-w-methoxypoly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl)
conform to the criteria that identify a low-risk polymer, there are no
concerns for risks associated with any potential exposure scenarios
that are reasonably foreseeable. The Agency has determined that a
tolerance is not necessary to protect the public health.

V. Cumulative Effects From Substances With a Common Mechanism of
Toxicity

    Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when considering
whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the Agency
consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative effects of
a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances that have a
common mechanism of toxicity.''
    EPA has not found 2-propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, dodecyl ester,
polymer with 1-ethenyl-2-pyrrolidinone and a-(2-methyl-1-oxo-2-propen-
1-yl)-w-methoxypoly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl) to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and 2-propenoic acid, 2-methyl-,
dodecyl ester, polymer with 1-ethenyl-2-pyrrolidinone and a-(2-methyl-
1-oxo-2-propen-1-yl)-w-methoxypoly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl) does not appear
to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that 2-
propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, dodecyl ester, polymer with 1-ethenyl-2-
pyrrolidinone and a-(2-methyl-1-oxo-2-propen-1-yl)-w-methoxypoly(oxy-
1,2-ethanediyl) does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other
substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which
chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's website at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.

VI. Additional Safety Factor for the Protection of Infants and Children

    Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply an
additional tenfold margin of safety for infants and children in the
case of threshold effects to account for prenatal and postnatal
toxicity and the completeness of the data base unless EPA concludes
that a different margin of safety will be safe for infants and
children. Due to the expected low toxicity of 2-propenoic acid, 2-
methyl-, dodecyl ester, polymer with 1-ethenyl-2-pyrrolidinone and a-
(2-methyl-1-oxo-2-propen-1-yl)-w-methoxypoly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl), EPA
has not used a safety factor analysis to assess the risk. For the same
reasons the additional tenfold safety factor is unnecessary.

VII. Determination of Safety

    Based on the conformance to the criteria used to identify a low-
risk polymer, EPA concludes that there is a

reasonable certainty of no harm to the U.S. population, including
infants and children, from aggregate exposure to residues of 2-
propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, dodecyl ester, polymer with 1-ethenyl-2-
pyrrolidinone and a-(2-methyl-1-oxo-2-propen-1-yl)-w-methoxypoly(oxy-
1,2-ethanediyl).

VIII. Other Considerations

A. Existing Exemptions From a Tolerance

    Not Available.

B. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    An analytical method is not required for enforcement purposes since
the Agency is establishing an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance without any numerical limitation.

C. International Residue Limits

    In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations
Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food
standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain
the reasons for departing from the Codex level.
    The Codex has not established a MRL for 2-propenoic acid, 2-methyl-
, dodecyl ester, polymer with 1-ethenyl-2-pyrrolidinone and a-(2-
methyl-1-oxo-2-propen-1-yl)-w-methoxypoly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl).

IX. Conclusion

    Accordingly, EPA finds that exempting residues of 2-propenoic acid,
2-methyl-, dodecyl ester, polymer with 1-ethenyl-2-pyrrolidinone and a-
(2-methyl-1-oxo-2-propen-1-yl)-w-methoxypoly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl) from
the requirement of a tolerance will be safe.

X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action establishes a tolerance under FFDCA section 408(d) in
response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and
Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this action has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this action is not
subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not contain any
information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require any
special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerance in this
final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
    This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this action. In addition, this
action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded
mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
    This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).

XI. Congressional Review Act

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

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

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

    Dated: November 30, 2017.
Michael Goodis,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

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

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

0
2. In Sec.  180.960, add alphabetically the polymer ``2-propenoic acid,
2-methyl-, dodecyl ester, polymer with 1-ethenyl-2-pyrrolidinone and a-
(2-methyl-1-oxo-2-propen-1-yl)-w-methoxypoly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl),
minimum number average molecular weight (in amu), 20,600'' to the table
to read as follows:

Sec.  180.960   Polymers; exemptions from the requirement of a
tolerance.

* * * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         Polymer                              CAS No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              * * * * * * *
2-propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, dodecyl ester, polymer with     193743-10-1
 1-ethenyl-2-pyrrolidinone and a-(2-methyl-1-oxo-2-
 propen-1-yl)-w-methoxypoly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl), minimum
 number average molecular weight (in amu), 20,600.......

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

[FR Doc. 2017-27805 Filed 12-22-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P