[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 19 (Friday, January 28, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4625-4626]
[FR Doc No: 2022-01730]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2018-N-3037]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office
of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Generic Clearance for
Quantitative Testing for the Development of Food and Drug
Administration Communications

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA, Agency, or we) is
announcing that a proposed collection of information has been submitted
to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA).

DATES: Submit written comments (including recommendations) on the
collection of information by February 28, 2022.

ADDRESSES: To ensure that comments on the information collection are
received, OMB recommends that written comments be submitted to https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular information
collection by selecting ``Currently under Review--Open for Public
Comments'' or by using the search function. The OMB control number for
this information collection is 0910-0865. Also include the FDA docket
number found in brackets in the heading of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ila S. Mizrachi, Office of Operations,
Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A-12M, 11601
Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has
submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for
review and clearance.

Generic Clearance for Quantitative Testing for the Development of FDA
Communications

OMB Control Number 0910-0865--Extension

    This notice requests extension of OMB approval of the FDA
information collection for a generic clearance that allows FDA to use
quantitative social/behavioral science data collection techniques
(i.e., surveys and experimental studies) to test consumers' reactions
to FDA communications or educational messaging about FDA-regulated food
and cosmetic products, dietary supplements, and animal food and feed.
To ensure that communications activities and educational campaigns have
the highest potential to be received, understood, and accepted by those
for whom they are intended, it is important to assess communications
while they are under development. Understanding consumers' attitudes,
motivations, and behaviors in response to potential communications and
education messaging plays an important role in improving FDA's
communications.
    If the following conditions are not met, FDA will submit an
information collection request to OMB for approval through the normal
PRA process:
     The collections are voluntary;
     The collections are low burden for participants (based on
considerations of total burden hours, total number of participants, or
burden hours per participant) and are low cost for both the
participants and the Federal Government;
     The collections are noncontroversial;
     Personally identifiable information (PII) is collected
only to the extent necessary \1\ and is not retained;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ For example, collections that collect PII to provide
remuneration for participants of focus groups and cognitive
laboratory studies will be submitted under this request. All Privacy
Act requirements will be met.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Information gathered will not be used for the purpose of
substantially informing influential policy decisions; \2\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ As defined in OMB and Agency Information Quality Guidelines,
``influential'' means that ``an agency can reasonably determine that
dissemination of the information will have or does have a clear and
substantial impact on important public policies or important private
sector decisions.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Information gathered will yield qualitative findings; the
collections will not be designed or expected to yield statistical data
or used as though the results are generalizable to the population of
study.

    To obtain approval for an individual generic collection submission
that meets the conditions of this generic clearance, an abbreviated
supporting statement will be submitted to OMB along with supporting
documentation (e.g., a copy of the survey or experimental design and
stimuli for testing).
    FDA will submit individual quantitative collections under this
generic clearance to OMB. Individual quantitative collections will also
undergo review by FDA's Research Involving Human Subjects Committee,
senior leadership in the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition,
and PRA specialists.
    Respondents to this collection of information may include a wide
range of consumers and other FDA stakeholders, such as producers and
manufacturers who are regulated under FDA-regulated food and cosmetic
products, dietary supplements, and animal food and feed.
    In the Federal Register of September 9, 2021 (86 FR 50544), FDA
published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed
collection of information. Although one comment was received, it was
not responsive to the four collection of information topics solicited
and, therefore, will not be discussed in this document.
    We estimate the burden of this collection of information as
follows:

                           Table 1--Estimated Annual Third-Party Disclosure Burden by Anticipated Data Collection Methods \1\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Number of
                 Survey type                      Number of      disclosures    Total annual          Average burden per response           Total hours
                                                 respondents   per respondent    disclosures
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cognitive Interviews Screener................             720               1             720  0.083 (5 minutes)........................              60
Cognitive Interviews.........................             144               1             144  1........................................             144
Pre-test Study Screener......................           2,400               1           2,400  0.083 (5 minutes)........................             199
Pre-test Study...............................             480               1             480  0.25 (15 minutes)........................             120
Self-administered Surveys/Experimental                 75,000               1          75,000  0.083 (5 minutes)........................           6,225
 Studies Screener.
Self-administered Surveys/Experimental                 15,000               1          15,000  0.25 (15 minutes)........................           3,750
 Studies.
                                              ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total....................................  ..............  ..............  ..............  .........................................          10,498
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.

    Based on a review of the information collection since our last
request for OMB approval, we have made no adjustments to our burden
estimate. The total estimated annual burden is 10,498 hours. Current
estimates are based on both historical numbers of participants from
past projects as well as estimates for projects to be conducted in the
next 3 years. The number of participants to be included in each new
survey will vary, depending on the nature of the compliance efforts and
the target audience.

    Dated: January 20, 2022.
Lauren K. Roth,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2022-01730 Filed 1-27-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 238 (Monday, December 13, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77635-77636]
[FR Doc No: C1-2010-31212]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-1017; FRL-8853-4]

Cancellation Orders for Certain Pesticide Registrations:
Ethofumesate and Monosodium Methanearsonate (MSMA); Correction

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice; correction.

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

SUMMARY: EPA published a cancellation order in the Federal Register of
July 30, 2010, concerning the voluntary cancellation of several
pesticide products, one of which was Source Dynamics' ethofumesate
product, EPA Reg. No.<PHONE_NUMBER>5. This notice corrects, with respect
to that product, the July 30, 2010 Federal Register notice and
cancellation order regarding a public comment and the existing stocks
provision. Additionally, EPA published a cancellation order in the
Federal Register of July 14, 2010, concerning the voluntary
cancellation of affected monosodium methanearsonate (MSMA) pesticide
products. This notice corrects typographical errors in the July 14,
2010 notice and cancellation order regarding the EPA registration
numbers of two Albaugh Inc., MSMA products affected by the cancellation
order.

DATES: These corrections are effective December 13, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Maia Tatinclaux, Pesticide Re-
evaluation Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    The Agency included in the notice a list of those who may be
potentially affected by this action. If you have questions regarding
the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the
person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How can I get copies of this document and other related information?

    EPA has established a docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-1017. 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
Office of Pesticide Programs (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
Facility telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

II. What does this corrective notice do?

    This notice makes corrections to two Federal Register notices and
Cancellation Orders as set forth below.
    1. FR Doc. 2010-18773, published in the Federal Register of July
30, 2010 (75 FR 44954) (FRL-8837-1) is corrected as follows:
    a. On page 44954, third column, the fourth sentence of the SUMMARY,
``The Agency did not receive any comments on the notice.'' is corrected
to read ``The Agency received one comment from Bayer CropScience
regarding ethofumesate product EPA Reg. No.<PHONE_NUMBER>5. In response
to this comment, the Agency has changed the existing stocks provision
as it relates to EPA Reg. No.<PHONE_NUMBER>5. The new provision, as
specified in Unit VI. of this cancellation order titled ``Provisions
for Disposition of Existing Stocks'' allows no sales or distribution of
that product by the registrant. The public comment and a letter from
the Agency to Source Dynamics explaining the basis for this

change are included in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-1017.''
    b. On page 44964, first column, Unit VI. is corrected to read as
follows:

VI. Provisions for Disposition of Existing Stocks

    Existing stocks are those stocks of registered pesticide products
which are currently in the United States and which were packaged,
labeled, and released for shipment prior to the effective date of the
cancellation action. The existing stocks provisions for the products
subject to this order are as follows.
    The registrants may continue to sell and distribute existing stocks
products listed in Table 1 of Unit II., except EPA Reg. No. 082542-
00005, Ethofumesate Technical, until August 1, 2011, which is 1 year
after the publication of the cancellation order in the Federal
Register. Thereafter, the registrants are prohibited from selling or
distributing products listed in Table 1 of Unit II., except for export
in accordance with FIFRA section 17, or proper disposal. Persons other
than the registrants may sell, distribute, or use existing stocks of
products listed in Table 1 of Unit II., except EPA Reg. No. 082542-
00005, Ethofumesate Technical, until existing stocks are exhausted,
provided that such sale, distribution, or use is consistent with the
terms of the previously approved labeling on, or that accompanied, the
canceled products.
    Any sale or distribution by the registrant of existing stocks of
EPA Reg. No.<PHONE_NUMBER>5 is prohibited from July 30, 2010.
    2. FR Doc. 2010-17155 published in the Federal Register of July 14,
2010 (75 FR 40824) (FRL-8828-5) is corrected on page 40825, in Table
1.--MSMA Product Cancellations, in the first column of Table 1,
registration numbers, ``42750-38'' and ``42750-39'' are corrected to
read ``42750-28'' and ``42750-29,'' respectively.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection.

    Dated: December 3, 2010.
Richard P. Keigwin, Jr.,
Director, Pesticide Re-evaluation Division, Office of Pesticide
Programs.
[FR Doc. C1-2010-31212 Filed 12-10-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 90 (Thursday, May 11, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22056-22058]
[FR Doc No: 2017-09516]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Petition for Exemption From the Federal Motor Vehicle Motor Theft
Prevention Standard; Tesla

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.

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

SUMMARY: This document grants in full the petition of Tesla Motors
Inc's., (Tesla) petition for an exemption of the Model 3 vehicle line
in accordance with the Exemption from Vehicle Theft Prevention
Standard. This petition is granted because the agency has determined
that the antitheft device to be placed on the line as standard
equipment is likely to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor
vehicle theft as compliance with the parts-marking requirements of the
Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard (Theft Prevention
Standard). Tesla also requested confidential treatment for specific
information in its petition. While official notification on granting or
denying Tesla's request for confidential treatment will be addressed by
separate letter, no confidential information provided for purposes of
this document has been disclosed.

DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with
the 2017 model year (MY).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Hisham Mohamed, Office of
International Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer Standards, NHTSA, W43-
437, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. Mr. Mohamed's
phone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. His fax number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a petition dated September 16, 2016,
Tesla requested an exemption from the parts-marking requirements of the
Theft Prevention Standard for the Model 3 vehicle line beginning with
MY 2017. The petition requested an exemption from parts-marking
pursuant to 49 CFR part 543, Exemption from Vehicle Theft Prevention
Standard, based on the installation of an antitheft device as standard
equipment for the entire vehicle line.

    Under 49 CFR 543.5(a), a manufacturer may petition NHTSA to grant
an exemption for one vehicle line per model year. In its petition,
Tesla provided a detailed description and diagram of the identity,
design, and location of the components of the antitheft device for the
Model 3 vehicle line. Tesla proposes to install a passive, transponder-
based, electronic engine immobilizer device as standard equipment on
its Model 3 vehicle line beginning with its MY 2017 vehicles. Key
components of the antitheft device include an engine immobilizer,
central body controller, security controller, gateway function, drive
inverters and a passive entry transponder (PET). Tesla also stated that
the antitheft device is an upgraded version of the successful antitheft
device currently installed as standard equipment on all Tesla Model S/X
vehicles, and served as the basis for NHTSA's earlier granting of an
exemption for that vehicle line. Tesla also noted that improvements to
the existing antitheft device include a new coded exchange between the
drive inverters and central body controller and, enhanced security
communication between its components. Tesla further stated that its
antitheft device will be installed with an audible alarm system as
standard equipment on the entire line. Tesla stated that forced entry
into the vehicle or any type of unauthorized entry without the correct
PET will trigger an audible alarm. Tesla further stated that in
addition to an unauthorized access through the doors, the alarm will
also trigger when a break-in is attempted through both the front and
rear cargo areas.
    Tesla explained that its antitheft device will have a two-step
activation process with a vehicle code query conducted at each stage.
The first stage allows access to the vehicle when an authorization
cycle occurs between the PET and the Security Controller, as long as
the PET is in close proximity to the car and the driver either pushes
the lock/unlock button on the key fob, pushes the exterior door handle
to activate the handle sensors or inserts a hand into the handle to
trigger the latch release. During the second stage, vehicle operation
will be enabled when the driver sits in the driver's seat and has
depressed the brake pedal. The driver can then move the gear selection
stalk to drive or reverse. When one of these actions is performed, the
security controller will poll to verify if the appropriate PET is
inside the vehicle. Upon location of the PET, the security controller
will run an authentication cycle with the key confirming the correct
PET is being used inside the vehicle. Tesla stated that once
authentication is successful, the security controller initiates a coded
message through the gateway. If the code exchange matches the code
stored in the drive inverters, the exchange will authorize the drive
inverter to deactivate immobilization and allow the vehicle to be
driven under its own power. Tesla stated that the immobilizer is active
when the vehicle is turned off and the doors are locked. Any attempt to
operate the vehicle without performing and completing each task will
render the vehicle inoperable. Additionally, Tesla has incorporated an
additional security measure to protect its Model 3 vehicle line. Tesla
stated that when there are no user inputs to the vehicle within a
programmed period of time, immobilization of the antitheft device will
be reactivated, even if the car is unlocked or has the antitheft device
has already been deactivated.
    Tesla's submission is considered a complete petition as required by
49 CFR 543.7 in that it meets the general requirements contained in
Sec.  543.5 and the specific content requirements of Sec.  543.6.
    In addressing the specific content requirements of Sec.  543.6,
Tesla provided information on the reliability and durability of its
proposed device. Tesla stated that all components of its antitheft
device are contained inside the vehicle's passenger compartment in
locations not readily accessible, or are contained within other vehicle
components. Tesla stated that this will protect the antitheft device
from exposure to the elements as well as significantly limit
accessibility to those components by unauthorized personnel.
Additionally, Tesla stated that it expects the components of the
antitheft device to be reliable because the antitheft device relies on
electronic functions and not mechanical functions. Tesla also provided
the agency with a reliability engineering test report. Tesla believes
the report provides sufficient reliability and durability information
as required by 49 CFR 543.6(a)(1)(v). Tesla stated that the reliability
and durability testing completed on its Tesla Model 3 Security
Controller PCBA has shown to meet the requirements based on Tesla
Reliability Testing and Validation Specification and the Model 3
product launch reliability targets.
    Tesla stated that the Model 3 antitheft device will be similar to
the version designed to deter theft of its Model S and X vehicles. It
noted that similar to the Model S and X vehicle lines, its antitheft
device requires coded communication between the security controller and
drive inverters. Tesla further stated that even gaining access to the
12V power supply to the Security Controller or Gateway will not allow a
thief to bypass the system because only inputs from a correct code can
deactivate the system and allow the vehicle to function. Tesla also
stated that it expects the Model 3 vehicle line to achieve very, low
theft rates with the installation of its antitheft immobilizer device.
Tesla further stated it believes that having a powerful antitheft
device, with electronic locks and an alarm system installed on its
Model 3 vehicle line strongly indicates that its Model 3 vehicle line
will have significantly lower theft rates than comparable vehicles that
have only been parts marked in accordance with 49 CFR part 541.
    Comparatively, Tesla stated that the antitheft device proposed for
its Model 3 vehicle line is similar to other antitheft devices which
NHTSA has already determined to be as effective in reducing and
deterring motor vehicle theft as the parts marking requirements (i.e.,
the Tesla Model S and X vehicle lines). Specifically, the agency's data
show that using an average of 3 MY's (final 2012-2013 and preliminary
2014) theft rate data, the average theft rate for the Tesla Model S
vehicle line is (0.1123), which is well below the median theft rate of
3.5826. There is no theft rate data available for the Model X vehicle
line because it is a newly introduced vehicle.
    Based on the evidence submitted by Tesla, the agency believes that
the antitheft device for the Model 3 vehicle line is likely to be as
effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance
with the parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard
(49 CFR 541).
    Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49 CFR 543.7(b), the agency grants
a petition for exemption from the parts-marking requirements of part
541, either in whole or in part, if it determines that, based upon
substantial evidence, the standard equipment antitheft device is likely
to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as
compliance with the parts-marking requirements of part 541. The agency
finds that Tesla has provided adequate reasons for its belief that the
antitheft device for the Model 3 vehicle line is likely to be as
effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance
with the parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard.
This conclusion is based on the information Tesla provided about its
device.

    The agency concludes that the device will provide the five types of
performance listed in Sec.  543.6(a)(3): Promoting activation; attract
attention to the efforts of an unauthorized person to enter or move a
vehicle by means other than a key; preventing defeat or circumvention
of the device by unauthorized persons; preventing operation of the
vehicle by unauthorized entrants; and ensuring the reliability and
durability of the device.
    For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full Tesla's
petition for exemption for the Model 3 vehicle line from the parts-
marking requirements of 49 CFR part 541, beginning with the 2017 model
year vehicles. The agency notes that 49 CFR part 541, Appendix A-1,
identifies those lines that are exempted from the Theft Prevention
Standard for a given MY. 49 CFR 543.7(f) contains publication
requirements incident to the disposition of all part 543 petitions.
Advanced listing, including the release of future product nameplates,
the beginning model year for which the petition is granted and a
general description of the antitheft device is necessary in order to
notify law enforcement agencies of new vehicle lines exempted from the
parts marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard.
    If Tesla decides not to use the exemption for this line, it should
formally notify the agency. If such a decision is made, the line must
be fully marked according to the requirements under 49 CFR 541.5 and
541.6 (marking of major component parts and replacement parts).
    NHTSA notes that if Tesla wishes in the future to modify the device
on which this exemption is based, the company may have to submit a
petition to modify the exemption. Section 543.7(d) states that a part
543 exemption applies only to vehicles that belong to a line exempted
under this part and equipped with the antitheft device on which the
line's exemption is based. Further, Sec.  543.9(c)(2) provides for the
submission of petitions ``to modify an exemption to permit the use of
an antitheft device similar to, but differing from the one specified in
that exemption.''
    The agency wishes to minimize the administrative burden that Sec.
543.9(c)(2) could place on exempted vehicle manufacturers and itself.
The agency did not intend in drafting part 543 to require the
submission of a modification petition for every change to the
components or design of an antitheft device. The significance of many
such changes could be de minimis. Therefore, NHTSA suggests that if the
manufacturer contemplates making any changes, the effects of which
might be characterized as de minimis, it should consult the agency
before preparing and submitting a petition to modify.

    Authority: 49 CFR 1.95.

Raymond R. Posten,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2017-09516 Filed 5-10-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 246 (Monday, December 23, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70582-70584]
[FR Doc No: 2019-27588]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-87773; File No. SR-LTSE-2019-04]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Long-Term Stock Exchange; Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating
to Dual Listing

December 17, 2019.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that, on December 5, 2019, Long-Term Stock Exchange (``LTSE'' or
the ``Exchange'') 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\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    LTSE proposes to add two definitions to Rule 1.160 to clarify the
meaning of two amended terms--LTSE-Primary-Listed Security and Non-
LTSE-Primary-Listed Security--in the Rule 11 Series (Trading Rules) in
the context of an exchange that provides for dually-listed securities.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
website at https://longtermstockexchange.com/, at the principal office
of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

1. Purpose
    The rules of the Exchange provide for dual listings.\4\ The concept
of dual listing is not new. Companies have dually listed their
securities on NYSE and Nasdaq,\5\ and more recently, companies dual
list their securities on a foreign and U.S. exchange.\6\ One of the
reasons a company may dual list is to commit to comply with a more
stringent regulatory regime, such as an exchange's listing
standards.\7\ The Commission recently approved LTSE Rule 14.425, in
which the Exchange enhanced its listing standards to require companies
that list with the Exchange to adopt and publish a Long-Term
Stakeholder Policy, a Long-Term Strategy Policy, a Long-Term

Compensation Policy, a Long-Term Board Policy and a Long-Term Investor
Policy (collectively, ``Long-Term Policies'').\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Rule 14.210 (Dually-Listed Securities).
    \5\ See Craig Karmin, Nasdaq Draws 6 Dual Listings, Including H-
P and Schwab, Wall St. J. (Jan. 13, 2004), https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB107391401136003100.
    \6\ Dual listing in the United States and a foreign jurisdiction
allows a company to more easily reach a global set of investors and
benefit from a multitude of trading venues. See International
Investing, Sec. & Exch. Comm'n (Dec. 7, 2016), available at https://www.sec.gov/reportspubs/investor-publications/investorpubsininvesthtm.html (``Although most foreign stocks trade
in the U.S. markets as ADRs, some foreign companies list their stock
directly here as well as in their local market. For example, some
Canadian stocks that are listed and trade on Canadian markets are
also listed and trade directly in U.S. markets, rather than as ADRs.
Some foreign companies list their securities in multiple markets,
which may include U.S. markets.'').
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50741 (Nov. 29,
2004), 69 FR 70296, 70298 (Dec. 3, 2004) (``Nasdaq believes issuers
that become dually listed voluntarily undertake a second set of
regulations and therefore demonstrate their commitment to regulatory
excellence.''). See generally Cecilia Caglio, et al., Going Public
Abroad 3 (DERA, Working Paper, Nov. 2013), available at https://www.sec.gov/files/rsfi-wp2013-01.pdf (``[G]oing public in a market
with more stringent securities laws can also maximize proceeds by
enabling the issuing firm to credibly commit to greater ongoing
disclosure.'').
    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 86722 (Aug. 21,
2019), 84 FR 44952 (Aug. 27, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Dually-Listed Securities as defined in the Exchange Rule 14.210
refers to securities that also are listed on another national
securities exchange registered with the Commission under Section 6(a)
of the Act. Inasmuch as Dually-Listed Securities, by virtue of already
being listed on another national securities exchange are eligible to
trade on each of the registered national securities exchanges under
Unlisted Trading Privileges (``UTP''), the primary benefit to an issuer
from such a dual listing flows from its commitment to adhere to the
Exchange's differentiated listing standards, e.g., the Long-Term
Policies. The Long-Term Policies are intended to better enable
companies to focus on long-term value creation, potentially enhancing
opportunities for capital formation, including capital from long-term
focused institutional investors and index funds that have established
long-term focused mandates.
    The decision to offer companies the option of dually listing is not
aimed at displacing the role of the primary listing market in the
opening and closing auctions. Indeed, the Commission recently noted the
role of the primary listing market in working with the Nasdaq and NYSE
to provide transparency on how a closing price would be determined if a
systems or technical issue prevented normal exchange operations.\9\ In
that approval order, the Commission noted ``that the primary listing
market's closing price for a security is relied upon by market
participants for a variety of reasons, including, but not limited to,
calculation of index values, calculation of the net asset value of
mutual funds and exchange-traded products, and the price of derivatives
that are based on the security.'' \10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 78014 (June 8,
2016), 81 FR 38755 (June 14, 2016).
    \10\ Id. at 38757. See also Research Note: Equity Market
Volatility on August 24, 2015, Sec. & Exch. Comm'n (Dec. 2015),
available at https://www.sec.gov/marketstructure/research/equity_market_volatility.pdf (discussing the impact of the opening
and re-opening process at the primary listing market, noting that
S&P Dow Jones Indices LLP (``S&P DJI'') generally uses prices from
only the primary listing exchange for calculating index values,
including the S&P 500 Index that provides the reference for
triggering market-wide circuit breakers and the that the price of
the opening cross on the primary listing exchange (if it occurs
before 9:35) is used as a reference price for calculation of the
first Limit Up-Limit Down price bands of a trading day).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To maintain the status quo and ensure that dual listings do not
interfere with the primary listing market in various market operations,
including managing the opening and closing auctions as well as
addressing intra-day auctions as a result of market pauses or halts,
the Exchange proposes to amend the term ``LTSE-listed security'' as
used throughout the Rule 11 Series to ``LTSE-Primary-Listed Security''
and define it in Rule 1.160 (Definitions) to mean ``a class of
securities listed on the Exchange for which the Exchange is the primary
listing market.'' Likewise, the Exchange proposes to amend the term
``non-LTSE-listed security'' as used throughout the Rule 11 Series to
``Non-LTSE-Primary-Listed Security'' and define it in Rule 1.160 to
mean ``(i) any UTP Security; and (ii) any Dually-Listed Securities, as
provided for in Rule 14.210, which are not LTSE-Primary-Listed
Securities.'' \11\ These proposed clarifications are already
implemented in part in the supplementary material to Rule 14.210, which
excludes the applicability of various provisions in Rule 11.282
(Regulatory Trading Halts) to Dually-Listed Securities where LTSE is
not the primary listing market. In reviewing the Rule 11 Series, the
Exchange observed that there are other provisions in the Rule 11 Series
that would benefit from similar clarity in the context of dual
listings. In particular, the provisions applicable to a Market Maker's
request to withdraw quotations in a security and terminate its
registration in a security as contained in Rules 11.152(c)(1) and
(e)(3), and in Rule 11.153(a), pertain to activity for LTSE-Primary-
Listed Securities and are proposed to be amended accordingly.
Additionally, the provisions in Rule 11.190 describing the handling of
market orders submitted before the open of the Regular Market Session
are proposed to be amended in paragraphs (a)(2)(E)(ii) and (f)(1) to
distinguish between the Auction process provided for in Rule 11.350,
which applies to LTSE-Primary-Listed Securities, and the Opening
Process provided for in Rule 11.231, which applies to Non-LTSE-Primary-
Listed Securities.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ ``UTP Security'' is defined in Rule 1.160 as ``any security
that is not listed on the Exchange, but is traded on the Exchange
pursuant to unlisted trading privileges.'' ``Dually-Listed
Securities,'' as provided for in Rule 14.210, means ``a class of
securities that has been approved for listing on another national
securities exchange registered with the Commission pursuant to
Section 6(a) of the Act.''
    \12\ The proposed rule change also would amend the title of Rule
11.231.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although Supplementary Material .01 to Rule 14.210 states that the
Exchange shall continue to honor the trade halt authority of the
primary listing market under the CQ and CTA Plans or the UTP Plan, as
applicable, the proposed rule change would amend Rule 11.281(a)(8) to
use the new proposed definitions in place of the more generic LTSE-
listed and non-LTSE-listed securities rule text. Similar amendments are
proposed to Rule 11.282(a)(1) and (a)(4) with respect to Regulatory
Trading Halts, with the latter addressing, in addition, American
Depository Receipts (``ADRs'') that are LTSE-Primary-Listed Securities.
    Rule 11.330 describes various data products to be offered by the
Exchange, and the proposed rule change would amend paragraph (a)(1) to
clarify that the Auction Information to be provided via the LTSE Web
Platform pertains to LTSE-Primary-Listed Securities. Lastly, as
previously noted above, Rule 11.350 governs how auctions are conducted
on the Exchange. To clarify that these provisions apply to primary
listed securities, the term ``LTSE-listed security'' is proposed to be
replaced with ``LTSE-Primary-Listed Security'' in Rule 11.350
paragraphs (a)(1)(E)(i), (a)(10)-(13), (c)(2), (c)(2)(B), (c)(2)(D),
(c)(2)(E), (c)(2)(F), (d)(2), (d)(2)(B), (d)(2)(D), (e), (e)(2)(C),
(f), (f)(1)(A), (f)(2)(C)(iii), (f)(2)(E), (f)(3), (f)(3)(B)(ii), and
Supplementary Material .02.
    In creating these two new definitions, the Exchange desires to
maintain the definitions in Rule 1.160 in alphabetical order. However,
to maintain flexibility to add or delete defined terms in the future,
the Exchange proposes to remove specific cross-references to defined
terms throughout the rule book, while keeping the cross-references to
Rule 1.160, more generally.\13\ These proposed changes would remove the
cross-reference to ``Rule 1.160(m)'' in Rule 14.202(h), and the 26
cross-references to ``Rule 1.160(qq)'' in Rules 14.207(b)(1)-(2),
14.501(c), and 14.505(k), and in the Supplementary Material to Rule
14.207.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Very few of the definitions are cross-referenced to Rule
1.160, and even fewer are done at the paragraph or subparagraph
level.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\14\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\15\ in
particular, in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, promote just and equitable principles
of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged
in facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to
and perfect the mechanisms of a free and open market

and a national market system and, in general, to protect investors and
the public interest. In this respect, the proposed rule change would
help ensure that issuers, investors and the public more easily
understand the meaning and operation of the Exchange's trading rules as
applied to dually-listed securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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 prior to
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, it has become effective pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \16\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
thereunder.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \17\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
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 of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \18\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 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_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-LTSE-2019-04 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-LTSE-2019-04. 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 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 also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. 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-LTSE-2019-04 and should be submitted on
or before January 13, 2020.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-27588 Filed 12-20-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 40 (Monday, March 2, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 11123-11126]
[FR Doc No: 2015-04282]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2014-1059]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Moon Island--Long Island Bridge Demolition; Boston
Inner Harbor, Quincy Bay; Quincy, MA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing two temporary safety zones
within the Sector Boston, Captain of the Port (COTP) Zone on the
navigable waters of the Boston Inner Harbor, Quincy Bay for the
demolition of the Moon Island--Long Island Bridge, between Moon Island
and Long Island, Boston, MA. This action is necessary to provide for
the safety of life on navigable waters prior to and during demolition
and removal of the bridge spans. Entering into, transiting through,
remaining in, anchoring, or mooring within this safety zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port (COTP) Sector
Boston.

DATES: This rule is effective without actual notice from 12:01 a.m. on
March 2, 2015 until 11:59 p.m. on December 31, 2015. For the purposes
of enforcement, actual notice will be used from the date the rule was
signed, February 13, 2015, until March 2, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2014-1059 and are available online
by going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2014-1059 in the
``Keyword'' box, and then clicking ``Search.'' They are also available
for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30),
U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this notice,
contact Mr. Mark Cutter, Coast Guard Sector Boston Waterways Management
Division, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you
have questions on viewing material related to the docket, call Cheryl
Collins, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms

DHS Department of Homeland Security
COTP Captain of the Port
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
NAD 83 North American Datum of 1983

A. Regulatory Information and Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing an NPRM with respect to this rule
because publishing an NPRM would be impracticable and contrary to the
public interest. Sufficient information regarding the severe
deteriorating condition of this bridge was only received by the City of
Boston in October 2014 after an inspection was conducted in accordance
with the new Federal Highways Administration (FHWA) guidelines. That
inspection deemed the bridge unsafe for a live load rating for
vehicular traffic, dropping the bridge below the minimum standards.
Further, in January 2015, a 60 foot by 12 inch water main broke off the
bridge above the navigational channel and fell into the channel.
Although the pipe was later removed, the condition of the bridge
remains a hazard.
    The demolition of the bridge will start immediately and will take
approximate three to five months. Accordingly, there is insufficient
time to publish an NPRM and solicit comments from the public before the
demolition takes place. Thus, waiting for a comment period to run would
inhibit the Coast Guard's ability to fulfill its mission to keep the
ports and waterways safe.
    It is crucial to the operation of the waterway that this $21
million-demolition project remains on schedule and is completed before
the recreational boating season traffic starts. The commuter ferry
service that transits between Weymouth-Hingham and Boston has adapted
to another route, adding approximately 10 minutes of time to their
scheduled runs. The contractor is expected to remove the 225 foot
navigational span first, so that commuter ferries can resume transiting
their normal route. The actual removal of the sixteen spans is complex
and involves a combination of a controlled detonation and conventional
demolition. If the bridge demolition project is delayed up it would
have serious ramifications to the waterway stakeholders, especially
during the summer boating season when it is heavily used by
recreational boaters. Due to the dangers posed by the condition of the
bridge and the controlled and conventional demolition of such a large
structure over a waterway, the different safety zones are necessary to
provide for the safety of any vessels transiting the area. For the
safety concerns noted, it is in the public interest to have these
regulations in effect immediately and during the demolition phases.
    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. For the same reasons discussed in
the preceding paragraph, delaying the effective date of this rule would
be impracticable and contrary to the public interest.

B. Basis and Purpose

    The legal basis for the temporary rule is 33 U.S.C., 1231, 46
U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; Pub. L. 107-295,
116 Stat. 2064; and Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1, which collectively authorize the Coast Guard to define
regulatory safety zones.
    The temporary safety zones are being established to prohibit
vessels from transiting the navigational channel until the span is
permanently removed and from transiting in the vicinity of the existing
Long Island Bridge during the bridge's demolition and removal.

C. Discussion of the Temporary Final Rule

    For the reasons discussed above, the COTP is establishing temporary
safety zones in the vicinity of the Moon Island

Long Island Bridge to ensure the safety of vessels and other property
from the hazards associated with the current condition of the bridge
and the bridge demolition. The COTP Boston has determined that the
actual condition of the bridge and the demolition of such a large
structure over the waterway pose a significant risk to public safety
and property. Hazards include the falling of parts from the
deteriorated bridge to include large pieces of heavy metal, possible
flying fragments from the controlled detonation and the obstructions to
the waterway that may contribute to marine casualties, such as crane
barges, work vessels, and construction equipment, and large pieces of
debris falling into the water that may cause death or serious bodily
harm. Establishing a safety zone around the location of the
navigational channel until it is permanently removed and during the
controlled detonation and the conventional demolition operations will
help ensure the safety of vessels and other property and help minimize
the associated risks.
    The Coast Guard has been coordinating with contractors and local
stakeholders regarding the scope of the overall project. The
stakeholders that may be affected by this rulemaking have been notified
of the risks of transiting this navigational channel and have since
modified their ferry routes. They also know the potential impacts to
the waterway from this project.
    Vessels may enter or transit through the safety zones during the
effective period if authorized by the COTP Boston or the designated
representative.
    The COTP will cause notice of enforcement or suspension of
enforcement of the safety zones to be made by all appropriate means to
affect the widest distribution among the affected segments of the
public. Such means of notification will include, but is not limited to,
Broadcast Notice to Mariners and Local Notice to Mariners.

D. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as
supplemented by Executive Order 13563, and does not require an
assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of
that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it
under that Order.
    The Coast Guard determined that this rule is not a significant
regulatory action for the following reasons: The safety zone for the
navigational channel will be of limited duration, expecting to
completed by the end February 2015, and the commuter ferries have
already rerouted out of safety concerns with the previous falling
debris from the bridge and have requested that the navigational bridge
span be removed at the earliest stages of the project. This time of the
season there is no recreational boating traffic.
    Persons and/or vessels may enter the safety zone if they obtain
permission from the Coast Guard COTP, Boston.
    Notifications will be made to the local maritime community through
the Local Notice to Mariners and Broadcast Notice to Mariners well in
advance of the demolition.

2. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 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.
    For all of the reasons discussed in the Regulatory Planning And
Review section, the Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that
this rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offer to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so that they can better evaluate its
effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process. 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 Mr. Mark Cutter at the telephone
number or email address indicated under the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this notice.
    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.

4. Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

5. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under
that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for
federalism.

6. 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.

7. 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 expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in
this preamble.

8. Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not cause a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive

Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Interference with
Constitutionally Protected Property Rights.

9. Civil Justice Reform

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

10. Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.

11. Indian Tribal Governments

    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.

12. Energy Effects

    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' under Executive
Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.

13. Technical Standards

    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (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 the establishment of a safety zone.
This rule is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph
34(g) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. An environmental
analysis checklist supporting this determination and a Categorical
Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where indicated
under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to
the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this rule.

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; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703;
50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5;
Pub. L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.2

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T01-1059 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T01-1059  Moon Island--Long Island Bridge Demolition, Boston
Inner Harbor--Quincy Bay, Massachusetts.

    (a) General. A temporary safety zone is established for the bridge
demolition as follows:
    (1) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All navigable
waters, from surface to bottom, within two hundred (200) yards of the
Moon Island--Long Island Bridge, Boston Inner Harbor--Quincy Bay, MA,
and enclosed by a line connecting the following points (NAD 83):

                 Latitude                             Longitude

42[deg]18'44'' N..........................  70[deg]58'40'' W; thence to
42[deg]18'33'' N..........................  70[deg]58'31'' W; thence to
42[deg]18'18'' N..........................  70[deg]59'10'' W; thence to
42[deg]18'29'' N..........................  70[deg]59'20'' W; thence to
                                             point of origin.

    (2) Effective and Enforcement Period. This rule will be effective
and enforced from 12:01 a.m. on February 13, 2015 to 11:59 p.m. on
December 31, 2015.
    (b) General. A temporary safety zone is established for the
controlled detonation demolition phase as follows:
    (1) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All navigable
waters, from surface to bottom, within approximately one thousand
(1000) yards of the Moon Island--Long Island Bridge, Boston Inner
Harbor--Quincy Bay, Massachusetts, and enclosed by a line connecting
the following points (NAD 83):

                 Latitude                             Longitude

42[deg]18'38'' N..........................  70[deg]58'36'' W; thence to
42[deg]18'30'' N..........................  70[deg]57'37'' W; thence to
42[deg]17'44'' N..........................  70[deg]59'20'' W; thence to
42[deg]18'23'' N..........................  70[deg]59'14'' W; thence to
42[deg]18'41'' N..........................  70[deg]59'54'' W; thence to
42[deg]19'11'' N..........................  70[deg]58'43'' W; thence to
                                             point of origin.

    (2) Effective and Enforcement Period. This rule will be effective
from 12:01 a.m. on February 13, 2015 to 11:59 p.m. on December 31,
2015, however it will be enforced on the actual date(s) of the
controlled detonation, to be determined at a later date. Coast Guard
Sector Boston will give actual notice to mariners via Local Notice to
Mariners and Broadcast Notice to Mariners
    (c) Regulations. While this safety zone is being enforced, the
following regulations, along with those contained in 33 CFR 165.23,
apply:
    (1) No person or vessel may enter or remain in this safety zone
without the permission of the Captain of the Port (COTP), Sector Boston
the COTP's representatives. However, any vessel that is granted
permission by the COTP or the COTP's representatives must proceed
through the area with caution and operate at a speed no faster than
that speed necessary to maintain a safe course, unless otherwise
required by the Navigation Rules.
    (2) Any person or vessel permitted to enter the security zone shall
comply with the directions and orders of the COTP or the COTP's
representatives. Upon being hailed by a U.S. Coast Guard vessel by
siren, radio, flashing lights, or other means, the operator of a vessel
within the zone shall proceed as directed. Any person or vessel within
the security zone shall exit the zone when directed by the COTP or the
COTP's representatives.
    (3) To obtain permissions required by this regulation, individuals
may reach the COTP or a COTP representative via VHF channel 16 or 617-
223-5757 (Sector Boston Command Center) to obtain permission.
    (4) Penalties. Those who violate this section are subject to the
penalties set forth in 33 U.S.C. 1232 and 50 U.S.C. 1226.
    (d) Notification. Coast Guard Sector Boston will give actual notice
through the Local Notice to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to Mariners and
to mariners for the purpose of enforcement of this temporary safety
zone. Also, Sector Boston will notify the public to the greatest extent
possible of any period in

which the Coast Guard will suspend enforcement of this safety zone.
    (e) COTP Representative. The COTP's representative may be any Coast
Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty officer or any Federal, state, or
local law enforcement officer who has been designated by the COTP to
act on the COTP's behalf. The COTP's representative may be on a Coast
Guard vessel, a Coast Guard Auxiliary vessel, a state or local law
enforcement vessel, or a location on shore.

    Dated: February 13, 2015.
J.C. O'Connor III,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Boston.
[FR Doc. 2015-04282 Filed 2-27-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 60 (Tuesday, March 29, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17939-17941]
[FR Doc No: 2022-06535]

========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.

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

Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 60 / Tuesday, March 29, 2022 / Rules
and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0617; Project Identifier MCAI-2021-00385-T;
Amendment 39-21879; AD 2021-26-20]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Airbus SAS Model A300 B4-600, B4-600R, and F4-600R series airplanes,
and Model A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes (collectively called Model
A300-600 series airplanes). This AD was prompted by a determination
that new or more restrictive airworthiness limitations are necessary.
This AD requires revising the existing maintenance or inspection
program, as applicable, to incorporate new or more restrictive
airworthiness limitations, as specified in a European Union Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA) AD, which is incorporated by reference. The FAA is
issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective May 3, 2022.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publications listed in this AD as of May 3,
2022.

ADDRESSES: For EASA material incorporated by reference (IBR) in this
AD, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany;
telephone +49 221 8999 000; email [email protected]; internet
www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this IBR material on the EASA website
at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view this material at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available in the AD
docket at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating
Docket No. FAA-2021-0617.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0617; or in person at
Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this final rule, the
mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI), any comments
received, and other information. The address for Docket Operations is
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: Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, Large
Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, FAA, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2021-0093, dated March 30, 2021
(EASA AD 2021-0093) (also referred to as the Mandatory Continuing
Airworthiness Information, or the MCAI), to correct an unsafe condition
for all Airbus SAS Model A300-600 series airplanes.
    EASA AD 2021-0093 specifies that it requires tasks (limitations)
already required by EASA AD 2019-0090 (which corresponds to FAA AD
2019-21-01, Amendment 39-19767 (84 FR 56935, October 24, 2019) (AD
2019-21-01)) and EASA AD 2020-0111R2 (which corresponds to FAA AD 2020-
23-11, Amendment 39-21327 (85 FR 75838, November 27, 2020) (AD 2020-23-
11)) and invalidates prior instructions for those tasks. For AD 2019-
21-01 and AD 2020-23-11, this AD terminates the limitation for the
tasks identified in the service information referred to in EASA AD
2021-0093 only.
    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all Airbus SAS Model
A300-600 series airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register
on August 9, 2021 (86 FR 43440). The NPRM was prompted by a
determination that new or more restrictive airworthiness limitations
are necessary. The NPRM proposed to require revising the existing
maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate new or
more restrictive airworthiness limitations, as specified in EASA AD
2021-0093.
    The FAA is issuing this AD to address fatigue cracking, damage, and
corrosion in principal structural elements, which could result in
reduced structural integrity of the fuselage. See the MCAI for
additional background information.

Discussion of Final Airworthiness Directive

Comments

    The FAA received a comment from FedEx Express, who supported the
NPRM without change.
    The FAA received additional comments from UPS Airlines. The
following presents the comments received on the NPRM and the FAA's
response to each comment.

Request To Revise the Proposed AD To Supersede Previous ADs

    UPS Airlines requested that the FAA minimize the number of
rulemaking activities in this area and suggested revising the current
proposed rule to include the latest released variation information and
the two current mandated rulings (AD 2019-21-01 and AD 2020-23-11),
while superseding them. UPS stated that it anticipates that EASA will
release a proposed AD to mandate the latest variation information. UPS
asserted that multiple active rulings for the same program requirements
place an unnecessary compliance tracking burden on operators for the
hundreds of tasks within the airworthiness limitations section (ALS)
program, while offering no enhancement or benefit to fleet
airworthiness.
    The FAA does not agree to revise this AD, because it is based on an
unsafe condition that requires new or more restrictive airworthiness
limitations, as issued by Airbus in a specific variation

of the ALS. As stated in the NPRM for this AD, the FAA determined that
the unsafe condition is likely to exist or develop in other products of
the same type design requiring the FAA to issue an AD of its own.
Furthermore, revising the proposed AD to include new variations (i.e.,
new requirements) would result in the need to reissue the notice and
reopen the period for public comment, adding unwarranted delay to the
rulemaking process. The FAA has determined that further delay of this
AD is not appropriate. This AD has not been changed with regard to this
request.

Request To Change Compliance Time

    UPS Airlines requested a minimum of 180 days for incorporation of
the new or revised ALS into their maintenance or inspection program
from the AD's effective date. UPS stated that changes identified in a
variation release are for ALS tasks that are not of concern for near-
term airworthiness.
    The FAA does not agree to the requested change. This AD merely
requires operators to update their existing maintenance or inspection
program within 90 days to include the revised ALS. Each ALS task has
its own associated compliance time. No change has been made to this AD
in response to this request.

Request To Remove Compliance Time

    UPS Airlines requested that the initial compliance time (the later
of the task threshold or within 90 days after the effective date) be
revised to remove the 90 day requirement. UPS noted the task threshold
in the ALS includes a calendar threshold in addition to flight cycle/
flight hour requirements. UPS stated it believes the 90-day requirement
is unnecessary and stated there is no technical data to support
reducing the compliance times in the ALS.
    The FAA does not agree to the requested change. The 90-day
requirement does not reduce any compliance times specified in the ALS.
The compliance time is the later of the times in the ALS and 90 days
after the effective date. Thus if any compliance time in the ALS is
later than 90 days after the effective date, operators would only need
to accomplish the task within the later compliance time. No change has
been made to this AD in response to this request.

Conclusion

    The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments
received, and determined that air safety requires adopting this AD as
proposed. Except for minor editorial changes, this AD is adopted as
proposed in the NPRM. None of the changes will increase the economic
burden on any operator. Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this AD to
address the unsafe condition on these products.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2021-0093 describes new or more restrictive airworthiness
limitations for airplane structures and safe life limits.
    This material is reasonably available because the interested
parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by
the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 118 airplanes of U.S.
registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this:
The FAA has determined that revising the existing maintenance or
inspection program takes an average of 90 work-hours per operator,
although the agency recognizes that this number may vary from operator
to operator. Since operators incorporate maintenance or inspection
program changes for their affected fleet(s), the FAA has determined
that a per-operator estimate is more accurate than a per-airplane
estimate. Therefore, the agency estimates the average total cost per
operator to be $7,650 (90 work-hours x $85 per work-hour).

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, 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.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13   [Amended]

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

2021-26-20 Airbus SAS: Amendment 39-21879; Docket No. FAA-2021-0617;
Project Identifier MCAI-2021-00385-T.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective May 3, 2022.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD affects AD 2019-21-01, Amendment 39-19767 (84 FR 56935,
October 24, 2019) (AD 2019-21-01) and AD 2020-23-11, Amendment 39-
21327 (85 FR 75838, November 27, 2020) (AD 2020-23-11).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies all Airbus SAS Model A300 B4-601, B4-603, B4-
620, B4-622, B4-605R, B4-622R, F4-605R, F4-622R, and C4-605R Variant
F airplanes, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 05, Time Limits/
Maintenance Checks.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a determination that new or more
restrictive airworthiness limitations are necessary. The FAA is
issuing this AD to address fatigue cracking, damage, and corrosion
in principal structural

elements, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the
fuselage.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Requirements

    Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD
2021-0093, dated March 30, 2021 (EASA AD 2021-0093).

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2021-0093

    (1) Where EASA AD 2021-0093 refers to its effective date, this
AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (2) The requirements specified in paragraphs (1) and (2) of EASA
AD 2021-0093 do not apply to this AD.
    (3) Paragraph (3) of EASA AD 2021-0093 specifies revising ``the
approved AMP'' within 12 months after its effective date, but this
AD requires revising the existing maintenance or inspection program,
as applicable within 90 days after the effective date of this AD.
    (4) The initial compliance time for doing the tasks specified in
paragraph (3) of EASA 2021-0093 is at the applicable ``thresholds''
as incorporated by the requirements of paragraph (3) of EASA AD
2021-0093, or within 90 days after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs later.
    (5) The provisions specified in paragraph (4) of EASA AD 2021-
0093 do not apply to this AD.
    (6) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2021-0093 does not apply
to this AD.

(i) Provisions for Alternative Actions and Intervals

    After the existing maintenance or inspection program has been
revised as required by paragraph (g) of this AD, no alternative
actions (e.g., inspections) or intervals are allowed unless they are
approved as specified in the provisions of the ``Ref. Publications''
section of EASA AD 2021-0093.

(j) Terminating Action for Certain Requirements of AD 2019-21-01 and AD
2020-23-11

    (1) Accomplishing the actions required by this AD terminates the
corresponding requirements of AD 2019-21-01, for the tasks
identified in the service information referred to in EASA AD 2021-
0093 only.
    (2) Accomplishing the actions required by this AD terminates the
corresponding requirements of AD 2020-23-11, for the tasks
identified in the service information referred to in EASA AD 2021-
0093 only.

(k) Additional AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Large Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, FAA, has
the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector or responsible Flight
Standards Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to
the Large Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, send it
to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (l) of this
AD. Information may be emailed to: [email protected].
Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal
inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the
responsible Flight Standards Office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, Large Aircraft
Section, International Validation Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus
SAS's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the
DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.
    (3) Required for Compliance (RC): Except as required by
paragraph (k)(2) of this AD, if any service information contains
procedures or tests that are identified as RC, those procedures and
tests must be done to comply with this AD; any procedures or tests
that are not identified as RC are recommended. Those procedures and
tests that are not identified as RC may be deviated from using
accepted methods in accordance with the operator's maintenance or
inspection program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided
the procedures and tests identified as RC can be done and the
airplane can be put back in an airworthy condition. Any
substitutions or changes to procedures or tests identified as RC
require approval of an AMOC.

(l) Related Information

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

(m) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of the service information listed in this
paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2021-0093,
dated March 30, 2021.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For EASA AD 2021-0093, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3,
50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000; email
[email protected]; internet www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this
EASA AD on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu.
    (4) You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness
Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St.,
Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material
at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this material that is incorporated by reference
at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, email
[email protected], or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on December 15, 2021.
Ross Landes,
Deputy Director for Regulatory Operations, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.

    Note: This document was received for publication by the Office
of the Federal Register on March 24, 2022.

[FR Doc. 2022-06535 Filed 3-28-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


International Journal of Epidemiology, 34, 610-622. doi:10.1093/ije/
dyi024. (Virtanen et al., 2005)
Wadsworth G et al. (2019). Pay, power, and health: HRI and the
agricultural conundrum. Labor Studies Journal, 44(3), 214-235.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0160449X18767749. (Wadsworth et al., 2019)
Wallace RF et al. (2007). Prior heat illness hospitalization and
risk of early death. Environmental Research, 104, 290-295.
doi:10.1016/j.envres.2007.01.003. (Wallace et al., 2007)
Washington Administrative Code (WAC) Title 296, General Occupational
Health Standards. Sections 296-62-095 through 296-62-09560. Outdoor
Heat Exposure. https://app.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=296-62&full=true#296-62-095; Emergency Rule 2125 CR103E. https://lni.wa.gov/rulemaking-activity/AO21-25/2125CR103EAdoption.pdf.
(Washington Administrative Code)

Authority and Signature

    James S. Frederick, Acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, U.S. Department of Labor, 200
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20210, authorized the
preparation of this document pursuant to the following authorities: 29
U.S.C. 653, 655, and 657, Secretary's Order 8-2020 (85 FR 58393; Sept.
18, 2020), and 29 CFR part 1911.

James S. Frederick,
Acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2021-23250 Filed 10-26-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 52 (Wednesday, March 18, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 14127]
[FR Doc No: 2015-06135]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP15-627-000.
    Applicants: KO Transmission Company.
    Description: Compliance filing per 154.203: Order No. 801, Natural
Gas Pipeline Maps to be effective 4/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 3/10/15.
    Accession Number: 20150310-5103.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/23/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-628-000.
    Applicants: Equitrans, L.P.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) rate filing per 154.204: Negotiated
Capacity Release Agreements--03-2015 to be effective 12/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 3/10/15.
    Accession Number: 20150310-5172.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/23/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-629-000.
    Applicants: Guardian Pipeline, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) rate filing per 154.204: Negotiated Rate
PAL Agreement--Koch Energy Services to be effective 3/10/2015.
    Filed Date: 3/10/15.
    Accession Number: 20150310-5196.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/23/15.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: March 11, 2015.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-06135 Filed 3-17-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


DRAFT NACOSH Temporary Workers Work Group             October 18, 2015

Protecting Temporary Workers:  General Responsibilities
General Responsibilities

Introduction: The staffing agency and the staffing agency's client (the host employer) are joint employers of temporary workers and, therefore, both are responsible for providing and maintaining a safe work environment for those workers. The staffing agency and the host employer must work together to ensure that the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (the OSH Act) requirements are fully met. See 29 U.S.C. § 651. The extent of the obligations of each employer will vary depending on workplace conditions and should therefore be described in the agreement or contract between the employers. Their safety and health responsibilities will sometimes overlap. Either the staffing agency or the host employer may be better suited to ensure compliance with a particular requirement, and may assume primary responsibility for it. The joint employment structure requires effective communication and a common understanding of the division of responsibilities for safety and health. Ideally, these will be set forth in a written contract.

   1. Host Employers are typically responsible for providing site-specific training including site-specific hazards and emergency response, assessing the need for PPE, providing PPE and training workers on the proper use and inspection of PPE.

   2. Under OSHA rules for recording and reporting occupational injuries and illnesses, host employers also are required to maintain records of illnesses and injuries of temporary employees if the temporary workers are subject to the host employer's direction and supervision. If they are not, then the staffing firms must record the illnesses and injuries on their own OSHA 300 logs. The rules' purpose is to ensure timely and accurate record-keeping by the employer in the best position to obtain the information and to assist OSHA in identifying high-hazard employers. Host employers also are required to cover temporary employees under OSHA's 1986 Hazard Communication Standard, which requires employers to notify employees of hazardous substances in the workplace, and should engage in medical surveillance or evaluations with respect to temporary workers.

   3. The following sample procedures for Host Employers and Staffing Agencies are meant to be used as examples for companies providing or utilizing temporary workers.

Protecting Temporary Workers: Host Employer Sample Procedure
General Responsibilities
      1. Provide a comprehensive job plan, worker support, communication, evaluation and feedback to the Staffing Agency.
      2. Develop, communicate and agree upon responsibilities of each entity.
      3. Provide a clear line of communication between for Staffing Agency and temporary Worker support.
      4. Advise Temporary Workers how to obtain more specific information at the work site to protect themselves from hazards they are likely to face on the job.
Host Employer Checklist:
   1. Prepare a job plan which includes:
         a. Comprehensive job scope with projected timeline
         b. Job Safety Analysis
         c. List of inherent and potential hazards at the worksite
         d. PPE hazard assessment and required PPE; generally, the host employer is to provide PPE and training
         e. List of workers needed
         f. Tasks to be performed with written job descriptions
         g. H&S Requirements
                 i. Temporary worker mentor/supervisory guidelines
                 ii. Worksite emergency response procedures
                 iii. Worker skills, training and required certifications for specialized work
                 iv. Incident reporting and investigation
                 v. Responsibility for supplying PPE
                 vi. Periodic communication and progress review
                 vii. Replacement of workers as necessary
         h. Contact list for bidding process
         i. Key contract elements
         j. On-site job review as needed
   2. Utilize a standardized evaluation process to select the staffing agency:
         a. Review staffing agency policies, practices, procedures, and records including:
                 i. Examples of Management HSE leadership
                 ii. Staffing agency's general safety training and orientation programs for temporary workers; post-incident training of temporary workers; and procedures for sharing results of worksite evaluations/inspections with temporary workers
                 iii. Examples of temporary employee involvement in incident investigations and responses, input into and suggestions for improvement in safety of host employer worksites
                 iv. OSHA citations
                 v. Procedures and practices for screening and verifying temporary employees' work credentials, including but not limited to reference checks; background checks; drug tests; skills testing; integrity testing; basic safety knowledge assessments; and physicals/medical examinations
                 vi. Incident reporting and investigation procedure and records
                 vii. Staffing agency's risk management policies and practices
                 viii. Records pertaining to staffing agency's classification of temporary workers as employees or independent contractors
                 ix. Examples of staffing agency's ongoing safety communication with temporary workers and host employers
                 x. Staffing agency's methods for staying up-to-date with laws and regulations pertaining to employee safety, as well as general employment and wage and hour laws
   3. Agree upon a comprehensive contract with the selected Staffing Agency
         a. Section 1 (a), (e-g) above
         b. Additional roles and responsibilities; e.g., responsibility for and verification of general and site-specific safety training, recording of temporary employees' injuries and illnesses on OSHA 300 Log
         c. Job on-site review as appropriate
         d. Procedure for Scope change
Protecting Temporary Workers:  Staffing Agency Sample Procedure
General Responsibilities
      1. Provide worker HR Support, communication, evaluation and feedback
      2. Verify temporary workers' credentials and provide general safety orientation
      3. Staffing firms have a "general duty" to take reasonable steps to determine conditions at the work site, provide employees with generic safety information, and advise them how to obtain more specific information at the work site to protect themselves from hazards they are likely to face on the job
 Staffing Agency Checklist:
   1. Obtain from the Host Employer and evaluate:
         a. Comprehensive job scope with projected timeline
         b. Job Safety Analysis
         c. List of worksite inherent and potential hazards
         d. PPE hazard assessment and required PPE which will be provided ( typically by the host employer)
         e. List of workers needed
         f. Tasks to be performed
         g. Worksite emergency response procedures
         h. Past years' OSHA 300 logs
         i. OSHA citations

      2. Prepare a temporary worker HR Support/communication/evaluation and feedback plan
   3. Prepare documentation in preparation for the host employer Health and Safety evaluation.
         j. Provide records and other information upon request including:
                 i. Examples of Management HSE leadership
                 ii. Staffing agency's general safety training and orientation programs for temporary workers; post-incident training of temporary workers; and procedures for sharing results of worksite evaluations/inspections with temporary workers
                 iii. Examples of temporary employee involvement in incident investigations and responses, input into and suggestions for improvement in safety of host employer worksites
                 iv. OSHA citations
                 v. Procedures and practices for screening and verifying temporary workers' credentials, including but not limited to reference checks; background checks; drug tests; skills testing; integrity testing; basic safety knowledge assessments; and physicals/medical examinations.
                 vi. Staffing agency's risk management policies and practices
                 vii. Records pertaining to staffing agency's classification of temporary workers as employees or independent contractors
                 viii. Examples of staffing agency's ongoing safety communication with temporary workers and host employers
                 ix. Staffing agency's methods for staying up-to-date with laws and regulations pertaining to employee safety, as well as general employment and wage and hour laws

   2. Coordinate as requested and as appropriate a comprehensive contract with the host employer.
         a. Section 1 (a), (e-h) above
         b. Additional roles and responsibilities; e.g., responsibility for and verification of general and site-specific safety training, recording of temporary employees' injuries and illnesses on OSHA 300 Log
         c. Job on-site review as appropriate
         d. Procedure for Scope change