[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 240 (Thursday, December 13, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 74258-74261]
[FR Doc No: 2012-30048]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-68383; File No. SR-NYSEMKT-2012-72]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE MKT LLC; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Amending Exchange Rule
952NY With Respect to Opening Trading in an Options Series

December 7, 2012.
    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 November 26, 2012, NYSE MKT LLC (the ``Exchange'' or ``NYSE
MKT'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II
below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Exchange Rule 952NY (Trading
Auctions) with respect to opening trading in an options series. The
text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web
site at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at
the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 952NY to provide for how the
System \3\ may open an options series for trading when there are no
executable orders and/or quotes and the bid-ask differential of the
NBBO disseminated by Options Price Reporting Authority (``OPRA'') or a
Market Maker quote does not exceed the bid-ask differential specified
under Rule 925NY(b)(4). The Exchange's Rules are currently silent on
how the System opens an options series when it does not conduct an
auction. Specifically, the proposed rule change (i) will codify that
the Exchange opens an option series when there are no executable orders
and/or quotes to match up in the System (``open a series on a quote''),
which is currently based on the bid-ask differentials that are within
the acceptable range defined in Rule 925NY(b)(4); and (ii) will also
amend the current process to provide that the bid-ask differential to
allow for the System to open a series on a quote would be based on the
bid-ask differentials specified in Rule 925NY(b)(5), which are wider
than the bid-ask differential that allows for the System to open via an
auction during the Auction Process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The term ``System'' refers to the Exchange's electronic
order delivery, execution and reporting system through which orders
and quotes for listed options are consolidated for execution and/or
display.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Current Opening Process
    Currently, Rule 952NY describes the process pursuant to which the
System opens an option series. Pursuant to the procedures described in
Rule 952NY(b) and (c), after the primary market for the underlying
security disseminates the opening trade or opening quote, the System
conducts an ``Auction Process'' to open a series whereby the System
determines a single price at which a series may be opened by looking
either to: (i) the midpoint of the initial uncrossed NBBO disseminated
by the Options Price Reporting Authority

(``OPRA''), or (ii) the midpoint of the best quotes or orders in the
System Book. If the bid-ask differential for a series is not within an
acceptable range, the System will not open the series for trading. For
purposes of this rule, the acceptable range means the bid-ask
differential guidelines specified in Rule 925NY(b)(4) (``narrow-width
quotes'').\4\ Assuming the bid-ask differential is within the
acceptable range, the System matches up orders and quotes in the system
based on price-time priority and executes the orders that are matched
at the midpoint pricing. Any orders in the System Book that are not
executed in the Auction Process become eligible for the Core Trading
Session immediately after the conclusion of the Auction Process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Exchange Rule 925NY(b)(4). The bid-ask guidelines
specified in Rule 925NY(b)(4) that are required to open a series are
narrower than the $5 wide bid-ask differential for options traded on
the System during Core Trading Hours. See also Exchange Rule
925NY(b)(5). Rule 925NY(b)(5) provides that options traded on the
System during Core Trading Hours may be quoted with a difference not
to exceed $5 between the bid and offer regardless of the price of
the bid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, although not currently specified in the rule, if the
bid-ask differential is within the acceptable range, but there are no
orders or quotes to be matched up with one another, the System will
open the series for trading on a disseminated quote, at which point any
unexecuted orders in the System Book during the Auction Process become
eligible for the Core Trading Session. If the bid-ask differential is
not within the acceptable range, the Exchange will not open that series
for trading until the System either receives a narrow-width NBBO from
OPRA or a Market Maker submits a narrow-width quote.
Proposed Change to Opening Process
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 952NY both to specify that the
System may open a series on a quote when there are no executable orders
and/or quotes and to amend the rule to provide a different bid-ask
differential for opening a series on a quote. As noted above, the
Exchange currently uses the narrow-width quote bid-ask differential for
determining both whether to open with an auction (when there are
executable orders and/or quotes) or with a quote (when there are no
executable orders and/or quotes). In codifying the process for opening
a series on a quote, the Exchange proposes to adopt the bid-ask
differential specified under Rule 925NY(b)(5) instead of the narrow-
width quotes.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Currently, if there are executable orders and/or quotes and
the options series does not meet the narrow-width quote bid-ask
differential, but does meet the standard-width quote differential,
the Exchange will not open the options series for trading. See
Exchange Rule 952NY(b)(D).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 925NY(b)(5) provides that options traded on the System during
Core Trading Hours may be quoted with a difference not to exceed $5
between the bid and offer regardless of the price of the bid
(``standard-width quote''). As proposed, if there are no executable
orders and/or quotes, but the OX System either receives a standard-
width quote NBBO from OPRA in that series or a Market Maker submits a
standard-width quote in the option series, the Exchange shall open the
series on a quote. The proposed change will align the requirements to
open the unopened series on a quote with the existing Market Marker
quoting requirements during Core Trading Hours.
    While the Exchange believes that narrow-width quoting requirements
are beneficial for opening auctions pursuant to the Auction Process in
the System, the Exchange believes that the continued application of the
narrow-width quoting requirement when there are no executable quotes
and/or orders to conduct an auction has the opposite effect and
prevents series from opening promptly and thus unnecessarily delays the
execution of orders on the Exchange. The Exchange believes that setting
a wider quote differential requirement for opening on a quote would
expedite the opening of all options series on the Exchange promptly
after the opening of the underlying security. The Exchange believes
that market participants will benefit by having the ability to execute
orders on the Exchange without unnecessary delay. In addition, applying
the standard-width quote bid-ask differential for opening a series on a
quote is consistent with the quoting requirements that are applicable
during Core Trading Hours.
    The Exchange further believes that applying the standard-width
quote for determining when to open a series on a quote is appropriate
because it would more closely align the Exchange's rules with the rules
of other option exchanges with respect to opening a series. Other
options exchanges have the ability to open a series for trading when
there are no executable orders and/or quotes to conduct an auction.
Both BOX Options Exchange (``BOX'') and NASDAQ Options Market
(``NOM''), allow for the opening of series without conducting an
opening auction. Neither BOX nor NOM require any bid-ask differential
to be met prior to opening series for trading on a quote. Specifically,
on BOX, the BOX system attempts to conduct an opening match (similar to
Auction Process) to determine a single price at which a particular
option series will be opened.\6\ During, the ``Pre-Opening Phase'' on
BOX, narrow bid-ask differentials are required in a similar manner to
the Exchange. However, if the BOX system is not able to determine an
opening price, the option series will nevertheless move from the ``Pre-
Opening Phase'' to the continuous trading phase and the option series
will be open for trading. When the option series move from Pre-Opening
Phase to the continuous trading phase, there is no requirement for a
bid-ask differential to be met. Market makers on BOX would only be
required to meet the $5 bid-ask differential in the option series if
and when they ever decided to quote.\7\ Similarly, NOM has no bid-ask
differential requirements to open a series if an ``Opening Cross''
(similar to Trading Auction) cannot be initiated because there are no
opening quotes or orders that lock or cross each other.\8\
Specifically, if an Opening Cross cannot be initiated because there are
no opening quotes or orders that lock or cross each other, the option
series will open for trading on NOM.\9\ Market makers on NOM would only
be required to meet the $5 bid-ask differentials in the option series
if and when they ever decided to quote.\10\ Both, BOX and NOM could
open options series and disseminate a protected quotation without the
benefit of Market Maker quotation to facilitate price discovery.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See BOX Rule 7070(e).
    \7\ See BOX Rule 7070(f). See also BOX Rule 8040, which sets
forth BOX market maker quoting obligations.
    \8\ See NOM Chapter VI, Section 8(c)(1).
    \9\ See id.
    \10\ See NOM Chapter VII, Section 6(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    By contrast, currently, if the options series does not meet the
narrow-width quotes, the series will not open at all on the Exchange,
which differs from BOX and NOM. As noted above, neither BOX nor NOM
require any bid-ask differential to be met prior to opening series for
trading on a quote. The current inability of the Exchange to open a
series without executable quotes and/or orders subject to a standard-
width quote requirement puts the Exchange at a competitive disadvantage
to other options exchanges that do not have that similar restriction.
By not opening the option series, the Exchange cannot display orders on
its Consolidated Book and thus has no protected quotation in the
options series. Until the options series officially opens for trading,
the Exchange cannot route out orders on its Consolidated

Book pursuant to Linkage, nor can it have a protected quote that draws
trading interest from other options markets. The Exchange believes that
the delay in execution of orders on the Exchange in this situation is
unnecessary and harmful to market participants. The Exchange's proposal
would provide for the ability to open a option series on a quote in a
similar fashion as both BOX and NOM, but in a more prudent and
conservative manner that the Exchange believes better protects
investors and other market participants. The Exchange believes that
having a bid-ask differential requirement to open a series is
beneficial for opening series and helps ensure there is a sufficient
quoted market in the options series, whether it is via NBBO from OPRA
or Market Maker generated quote, prior to opening of the series on the
Exchange to facilitate transactions in securities on the Exchange.
    To clarify that Rule 952NY governs the opening process, which
includes both trading auctions and opening on a quote, the Exchange
also proposes to amend the title of the rule by deleting the phrase
``Trading Auction'' and replacing it with ``Opening Process.'' In
addition, the Exchange proposes to clarify that the term ``Auction
Process'' refers to the opening procedures set forth in Rule
952NY(b)(A)-(D), when the Exchange opens an options series for trading
when there are orders and/or quotes that can be matched at a single
price point.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
``Act''),\11\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\12\ in particular, because it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in
securities, and to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change is designed to remove impediments to, and
perfect the mechanism of, a free and open market and a national market
system because it would permit the Exchange to open a series when there
are not sufficient orders or quotes to conduct an auction after
receiving notification from OPRA that an NBBO has been established for
the series or on a Market Maker quote, provided that the bid-ask
differential of the NBBO does not exceed the standard-quote width bid-
ask differential. The wider quote differential requirement for openings
when an Auction Process is not conducted will expedite the opening of
all options series on the Exchange promptly after the opening of the
underlying security, and thus remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market in a way that benefits market
participants and enables them to execute their orders on the Exchange.
    The proposed rule change contributes to the protection of investors
and the public interest by maintaining the narrow-width quote bid-ask
differentials for the Auction Process, which provides price protection
for customers and other market participants when they have executable
orders and quotes prior to the opening of a series on the Exchange.
    The proposal would provide fair and orderly means to open a series
when the Exchange does not have sufficient executable quotes and/or
orders to conduct an Auction Process and would reasonably ensure that
the Exchange does not open the series at a price that is beyond the
price at which Market Makers are permitted to quote for the series
during the Core Trading Session, which also contributes to the
protection of investors and the public interest, generally. The
proposed rule change is also designed to promote just and equitable
principles of trade because it would permit the Exchange to open a
series in a manner that is more consistent with the opening of
individual series on other option exchanges.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See supra notes 6 and 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    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 if consistent with the protection of investors
and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become effective
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \14\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.\15\ At any time within 60 days of the filing
of such proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily
suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such
action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the
protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of
the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \15\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). As required under Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii), the Exchange provided the Commission with written
notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a
brief description and the text of the proposed rule change, at least
five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule
change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-NYSEMKT-2012-72 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEMKT-2012-72. 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 Exchange. All comments received will be posted
without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to
File Number SR-NYSEMKT-2012-72 and should be submitted on or before
January 3, 2013.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-30048 Filed 12-12-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: May 2, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 84)]
[Notices]
[Page 24301-24303]
[DOCID:fr02my07-60]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0008; FRL-8122-5]

Lime-sulfur (Inorganic polysulfides); Reregistration Eligibility
Decision for Low Risk Pesticide; Notice of Availability

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of EPA's Reregistration
Eligibility Decision (RED) for the pesticide lime-sulfur (inorganic
polysulfides also called calcium polysulfide), and opens a public
comment period on this document, related risk assessments, and other
support documents. EPA has reviewed the low risk pesticide lime-sulfur
(inorganic polysulfides) through a modified, streamlined version of the
public participation process that the Agency uses to involve the public
in developing pesticide reregistration and tolerance reassessment
decisions. Through these programs, EPA is ensuring that all pesticides
meet current health and safety standards.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 2, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0008, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.

Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries

are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation (8:30
a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays).
Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. The Docket telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2007-0008. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the docket without change and may be made available on-line at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information

provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or e-
mail. The Federal regulations.gov website is an ``anonymous access''
system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you
send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through
regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and
included as part of the comment that is placed in the docket and made
available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot
contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your
comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters,
any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the docket index.
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 either in the electronic docket at http://www.regulations.gov
, or, if only available in hard copy, at the OPP

Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.),
2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The hours of operation of this
Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The Docket telephone number is (703) 305-
5805.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bentley C. Gregg, Special Review and
Reregistration Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of
interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human
health, and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry; pesticide
users; and members of the public interested in the sale, distribution,
or use of pesticides. Since others also may be interested, the Agency
has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be
affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the
applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Registerdate and page number).
    ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. Background

A. What Action is the Agency Taking?

    Under section 4 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), EPA is reevaluating existing pesticides to
ensure that they meet current scientific and regulatory standards.
Using a modified, streamlined version of its public participation
process, EPA has completed a RED for the low risk pesticide, lime-
sulfur (inorganic polysulfides also called calcium polysulfide) under
section 4(g)(2)(A) of FIFRA. Lime-sulfur is a fungicide applied
primarily in agricultural and residential settings, used to apply a
liquid form of inorganic sulfur to growing crops and other sites. EPA
has determined that the data base to support reregistration is
substantially complete and that products containing lime-sulfur
(inorganic polysulfides) will be eligible for reregistration. Upon
submission of the required product specific data under section
4(g)(2)(B) and any necessary changes to the registration and labeling
(either to address any concerns identified in the RED or as a result of
product specific data), EPA will make a final reregistration decision
under section 4(g)(2)(C) for products containing Lime-sulfur (Inorganic
polysulfides).
    EPA must review the exemptions from the requirement for a tolerance
that were in effect when the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) was
enacted in August 1996, to ensure that these existing pesticide residue
limits for food and feed commodities meet the safety standard
established by the new law. Tolerances are considered reassessed once
the safety finding has been made or a revocation occurs. EPA has
reviewed and made the requisite safety finding for the exemption from
the requirement for a tolerance for lime-

sulfur (inorganic polysulfides) included in this notice.
    Although the lime-sulfur (inorganic polysulfides) RED was signed on
September 30, 2005, certain components of the document, which did not
affect the final regulatory decision, were undergoing final editing at
that time. These components, including the summary of labeling changes,
appendices, and other relevant information, have been added to the
lime-sulfur (inorganic polysulfides) RED document. In addition,
subsequent to signature, EPA identified some minor errors and
ambiguities in the document. Therefore, for the sake of accuracy, the
Agency also has included the appropriate error corrections, amendments,
and clarifications. None of these additions or changes alter the
conclusions documented in the September 30, 2005, lime-sulfur
(inorganic polysulfides) RED. All of these changes are described in
detail in an errata memorandum which is included in the public docket
for lime-sulfur (inorganic polysulfides).
    EPA is applying the principles of public participation to all
pesticides undergoing reregistration and tolerance reassessment. The
Agency's Pesticide Tolerance Reassessment and Reregistration; Public
Participation Process, published in the Federal Register on May 14,
2004, (69 FR 26819)(FRL-7357-9) explains that in conducting these
programs, the Agency is tailoring its public participation process to
be commensurate with the level of risk, extent of use, complexity of
issues, and degree of public concern associated with each pesticide.
EPA can expeditiously reach decisions for pesticides like lime-sulfur
(inorganic polysulfides), which pose few or no risk concerns, affect
few stakeholders, and require no risk mitigation. Once EPA assesses
uses and risks for such low risk pesticides, the Agency may go directly
to a decision and prepare a document summarizing its findings, such as
the lime-sulfur (inorganic polysulfides) RED.
    The reregistration program is being conducted under Congressionally
mandated time frames, and EPA recognizes the need both to make timely
decisions and to involve the public in finding ways to effectively
mitigate pesticide risks. lime-sulfur (inorganic polysulfides),
however, poses no risks that require mitigation. The Agency therefore
is issuing the lime-sulfur (inorganic polysulfides) RED, its risk
assessments, and related support materials simultaneously for public
comment. The comment period is intended to provide an opportunity for
public input and a mechanism for initiating any necessary amendments to
the RED. All comments should be submitted using the methods in
ADDRESSES, and must be received by EPA on or before the closing date.
These comments will become part of the Agency Docket for lime-sulfur
(inorganic polysulfides). Comments received after the close of the
comment period will be marked ``late.'' EPA is not required to consider
these late comments.
    EPA will carefully consider all comments received by the closing
date and will provide a Response to Comments Memorandum in the Docket
and regulations.gov. If any comment significantly affects the document,
EPA also will publish an amendment to the RED in the Federal Register.
In the absence of substantive comments requiring changes, the lime-
sulfur (inorganic polysulfides) RED will be implemented as it is now
presented.

B. What is the Agency's Authority for Taking this Action?

    Section 4(g)(2) of FIFRA as amended directs that, after submission
of all data concerning a pesticide active ingredient, ``the
Administrator shall determine whether pesticides containing such active
ingredient are eligible for reregistration,'' before calling in product
specific data on individual end-use products and either reregistering
products or taking other ``appropriate regulatory action.''
    Section 408(q) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA),
21 U.S.C. 346a(q), requires EPA to review tolerances and exemptions for
pesticide residues in effect as of August 2, 1996, to determine whether
the tolerance or exemption meets the requirements of section 408(b)(2)
or (c)(2) of FFDCA.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Pesticides and pests.

    Dated: April 12, 2007.
Peter Caulkins,
Acting Director, Special Review and Reregistration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. E7-8276 Filed 5-1-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


? Need to return call by / at/ between and . Signature: Project No.: 0<IP_ADDRESS>   DISTRIBUTION Page ___ of _

Project Name: 304( m)

TELEPHONE CALL RECORD Outgoing Call Date: 6/ 29/ 05 Time: 2: 45 PM EST Company Name: Engelhard Corporation Erie, PA Contact Name: Richard Mirth Phone No.: ( 814) 870 3900 Name: Audrey Kasenge Eastern Research Group GENERAL SUBJECT : Sodium Nitrite Releases Reported to TRI TOPICS DISCUSSED AND ACTION TAKEN On Tuesday June 28, 2005 I called Mr. Mirth to ask how Engelhard Corp in SC estimates their sodium nitrite releases. Mr. Mirth returned my call on Wednesday June 29, 2005 and informed me that the facility measures nitrite in the wastewater monthly. Due to the large excess of sodium in the wastewater, the remaining pollutant is assumed to be sodium. The amount of sodium nitrite released is determined by multiplying the nitrite concentration by the annual flow rate, and then adding the sodium contribution based on its molecular weight.