[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 200 (Monday, October 17, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64162-64163]
[FR Doc No: 2011-26792]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Intent To Rule on Passenger Facility Charge (PFC)
Application 10-16-U-00-OAK To Use PFC Revenue, Collected at
Metropolitan Oakland International Airport, Oakland, CA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of Intent to Rule on Application.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to rule and invites public comment on the
application to use PFC revenue collected at Metropolitan Oakland
International Airport, under the provisions of the Aviation Safety and
Capacity Expansion Act of 1990 (Title IX of the Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act of 1990) (Pub. L. 101-508) and Part 158 of the
Federal Aviation Regulations (Title 14 CFR part 158).

DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 16, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Comments on this application may be mailed or delivered in
triplicate to the FAA at the following address: Federal Aviation
Administration, Airports Division, 15000 Aviation Blvd., Room 3012,
Lawndale, CA 90261. In addition, one copy of any comments submitted to
the FAA must be mailed or delivered to Ms. Deborah Ale-Flint, Director
of Aviation, Metropolitan Oakland International Airport, at the
following address: Port of Oakland, 530 Water Street, Oakland,
California 94604. Air carriers and foreign air carriers may submit
copies of written comments previously provided to the Port of Oakland
under section 158.23 of part 158.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Arlene Draper, Assistant Manager, San
Francisco Airports District Office, 831 Mitten Road, Room 210,
Burlingame, CA 94010-1303, Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, extension 601.
The application may be reviewed in person at this same location.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA proposes to rule and invites public
comment on the application to use PFC revenue collected at Metropolitan

Oakland International Airport under the provisions of the 49 U.S.C.
40117 and Part 158 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (Title 14 CFR
part 158).
    On October 11, 2011, the FAA determined that the application to use
PFC revenue submitted by the Port of Oakland was substantially complete
within the requirements of section 158.25 of Part 158. The FAA will
approve or disapprove the application, in whole or in part, no later
than January 18, 2012.
    The following is a brief overview of the use application No. 11-16-
U-00-OAK:
    Proposed charge effective date: April 1, 2021.
    Proposed charge expiration date: May 1, 2023.
    Level of the proposed PFC: $3.00.
    Total estimated PFC revenue: $70,259,000.

Description of Proposed Project

    Use PFC only: San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART)
Airport Connector--The project will provide a direct people mover
connection between the Coliseum BART station and Metropolitan Oakland
International Airport.
    Any person may inspect the application in person at the FAA office
listed above under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT and at the FAA
Regional Airports Division located at: Federal Aviation Administration,
Airports Division, 15000 Aviation Blvd., Room 3012, Lawndale, CA 90261.
In addition, any person may, upon request, inspect the application,
notice and other documents germane to the application in person at the
Port of Oakland.

    Issued in Lawndale, California, on October 11, 2011.
Debbie Roth,
Deputy Manager, Airports Division, Western-Pacific Region.
[FR Doc. 2011-26792 Filed 10-14-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 196 (Wednesday, October 10, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 50854-50857]
[FR Doc No: 2018-21876]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2017-0276; FRL-9985-11-Region 5]

Air Plan Approval; Illinois; Permit-by-Rule Provisions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving
revisions to the Illinois State Implementation Plan (SIP) to establish
a general framework for permits-by-rule (PBR) and specifically provide
a PBR for small boilers. In addition, EPA is approving other state
provisions that are affected by the addition of the PBR regulations, as
well as minor changes in nomenclature. EPA proposed to approve these
revisions on July 18, 2018.

DATES: This final rule is effective on November 9, 2018.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-R05-OAR-2017-0276. All documents in the docket are listed on
the www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is
not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard
copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either
through www.regulations.gov or at the Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays. We recommend
that you telephone Danny Marcus, Environmental Engineer, at (312) 353-
8781 before visiting the Region 5 office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Danny Marcus, Environmental Engineer,
Air Permits Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:

I. Background
II. What comments did we receive on the proposed action?
III. What action is EPA taking?
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    On May 2, 2017, the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA)
submitted a SIP revision to establish a general framework for a PBR
program. PBR programs establish a streamlined process that allows an
individual applicant to notify the reviewing authority that it meets
the eligibility criteria for the permit and the permit conditions
rather than going through a reviewing authority review and approval
process.
    Specifically, the SIP revision consists of: (1) IEPA revisions to
35 IAC Part 201 to add a new Subpart M (35 IAC 201.500 through
201.540), which establishes general provisions for a PBR program; (2)
IEPA revisions to Part 201 to add Subpart N to 35 IAC Part 201 (35 IAC
201.600 through 201.635), which establishes PBR requirements for
boilers burning certain types of fuel and with heat input capacities of
less than or equal to 100 Million British Thermal Units per Hour
(MMBtu/hr); (3) IEPA revisions to 35 IAC 201.103 and 35 IAC 211.4720 to
change and add certain abbreviations and definitions related to the new
PBR rules; (4) IEPA revisions to 35 IAC 201.104, incorporation by
reference, to reference regulations contained in the PBR program; and
(5) IEPA revisions to 35 IAC 201.146 to change the abbreviation of
``mmbtu/hr'' to ``MMBtu/hr.''

II. What comments did we receive on the proposed action?

    Our July 18, 2018 proposed rule (83 FR 33894) provided a 30-day
review and comment period. The comment period closed on August 17,
2018. EPA received one unrelated comment. This comment is outside the
scope of this rulemaking and does not provide

information that would alter EPA's evaluation of the proposed rule,
which is based on applicable statutory criteria.

III. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is approving Illinois' general PBR program contained in Subpart
M, the PBR for boilers less than or equal to 100 MMBtu/hr contained in
Subpart N, changes to other SIP rules affected by the PBR regulations,
and minor changes in nomenclature because they meet all applicable
requirements under the CAA. Specifically, EPA is approving into the
Illinois SIP IAC Sections 201.103(a) and (b); 201.104(a), (c), (d), and
(e); 201.146(c), (d), (h), (i), and (fff); 201.500; 201.505; 201.510;
201.515; 201.520; 201.525; 201.530; 201.535; 201.540; 201.600; 201.605;
201.610; 201.615; 201.620; 201.625; 201.630; 201.635; and 211.4720. EPA
is not acting on the revisions to IAC Section 201.146(mmm) for the
reasons discussed in the proposal (at 83 FR 33897).

IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the Illinois
Regulations described in the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth
below. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents
generally available through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 5
Office (please contact the person identified in the For Further
Information Contact section of this preamble for more information).
Therefore, these materials have been approved by EPA for inclusion in
the State implementation plan, have been incorporated by reference by
EPA into that plan, are fully federally enforceable under sections 110
and 113 of the CAA as of the effective date of the final rulemaking of
EPA's approval, and will be incorporated by reference in the next
update to the SIP compilation.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Clean Air Act
and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by December 10, 2018. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: September 25, 2018.
James Payne,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

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

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

0
2. In Sec.  52.720, the table in paragraph (c) is amended by:
0
a. Under ``201: Permits and General Provisions'':
0
i. Revising the entries for 201.103 and 201.104 under ``Subpart A:
Definitions''.
0
ii. Revising the entry for 201.146 under ``Subpart C: Prohibitions''.
0
iii. Adding headings after the entry for 201.408 titled ``Subpart M:
Permit By Rule (PBR)--General Provisions'' with entries for 201.500
through 201.540 and ``Subpart N: Permit By Rule (PBR)--Boilers Less
Than Or Equal To 100

MMBtu/hr'' with entries for 201.600 through 201.635.
0
b. Revising the entry for 211.4720 under ``Part 211: Definitions and
General Provisions'', ``Subpart B: Definitions''.
    The revisions and additions read as follows:

Sec.  52.720  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                 EPA-Approved Illinois Regulations and Statutes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    State
   Illinois citation         Title/subject     effective date    EPA approval date             Comments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  * * * * * * *
                                    Part 201: Permits and General Provisions
                                             Subpart A: Definitions

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  * * * * * * *
201.103................  Abbreviations and          3/24/2017  10/10/2018, [Insert   ...........................
                          Units.                                Federal Register
                                                                citation].
201.104................  Incorporations by          3/24/2017  10/10/2018, [Insert   Except (b).
                          Reference.                            Federal Register
                                                                citation].

                                                  * * * * * * *
                                             Subpart C: Prohibitions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
201.146................  Exemptions From            3/24/2017  10/10/2018, [Insert   Except (mmm).
                          State Permit                          Federal Register
                          Requirements.                         citation].

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  * * * * * * *
                               Subpart M: Permit By Rule (PBR)--General Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
201.500................  Purpose.............       3/24/2017  10/10/2018, [Insert   ...........................
                                                                Federal Register
                                                                citation].
201.505................  Applicability.......       3/24/2017  10/10/2018, [Insert   ...........................
                                                                Federal Register
                                                                citation].
201.510................  Notice of Intent to        3/24/2017  10/10/2018, [Insert   ...........................
                          Be Covered By a PBR                   Federal Register
                          (Notification).                       citation].
201.515................  Commencing                 3/24/2017  10/10/2018, [Insert   ...........................
                          Construction or                       Federal Register
                          Modification.                         citation].
201.520................  Modification or            3/24/2017  10/10/2018, [Insert   ...........................
                          Change in Status of                   Federal Register
                          an Emission Unit                      citation].
                          Covered by a PBR.
201.525................  Standard Conditions        3/24/2017  10/10/2018, [Insert   ...........................
                          for PBR.                              Federal Register
                                                                citation].
201.530................  Recordkeeping and          3/24/2017  10/10/2018, [Insert   ...........................
                          Reporting.                            Federal Register
                                                                citation].
201.535................  Authority to Operate       3/24/2017  10/10/2018, [Insert   ...........................
                                                                Federal Register
                                                                citation].
201.540................  Enforcement                3/24/2017  10/10/2018, [Insert   ...........................
                          Authority.                            Federal Register
                                                                citation].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Subpart N: Permit By Rule (PBR)--Boilers Less Than Or Equal To 100 MMBtu/hr
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
201.600................  Applicability.......       3/24/2017  10/10/2018, [Insert   ...........................
                                                                Federal Register
                                                                citation].
201.605................  Boiler Notice of           3/24/2017  10/10/2018, [Insert   ...........................
                          Intent to Be                          Federal Register
                          Covered by a PBR                      citation].
                          (Notification)
                          201.610.
201.615................  Opacity Requirements       3/24/2017  10/10/2018, [Insert   ...........................
                                                                Federal Register
                                                                citation].
201.620................  Requirements for Use       3/24/2017  10/10/2018, [Insert   ...........................
                          of Diesel Fuel and                    Federal Register
                          Refinery Fuel Gas                     citation].
                          201.625.
201.625................  Carbon Monoxide (CO)       3/24/2017  10/10/2018, [Insert   ...........................
                          Requirements.                         Federal Register
                                                                citation].
201.630................  Nitrogen Oxide (NOX)       3/24/2017  10/10/2018, [Insert   ...........................
                          Requirements.                         Federal Register
                                                                citation].
201.635................  PBR Boiler Reporting       3/24/2017  10/10/2018, [Insert   ...........................
                          Requirements.                         Federal Register
                                                                citation].

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  * * * * * * *
                                  Part 211: Definitions and General Provisions

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

                                                  * * * * * * *
                                             Subpart B: Definitions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
211.4720...............  Pipeline Natural Gas       3/24/2017  10/10/2018, [Insert   ...........................
                                                                Federal Register
                                                                citation].

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

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2018-21876 Filed 10-9-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 72 (Monday, April 15, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15283-15284]
[FR Doc No: 2019-07434]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2018-0347]

Commercial Driver's License Standards: Application for Exemption;
Navistar, Inc. (Navistar)

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

ACTION: Notice of final disposition; grant of application for
exemption.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to grant an exemption to
Navistar, Inc. (Navistar) for a commercial motor vehicle (CMV) driver
employed by its business partner MAN Truck & Bus AG (MAN) of Munich,
Germany. Navistar requested an exemption for Mr. Jerome Douay, a
Product Engineer Senior Manager with MAN. He holds a valid German
commercial license. MAN is partnering with Navistar to help develop
technology advancements in fuel economy and emissions reductions. Mr.
Douay wants to test drive Navistar vehicles on U.S. roads to better
understand product requirements in ``real world'' environments, and
verify results. Navistar believes the requirements for a German
commercial license ensure that operation under the exemption will
likely achieve a level of safety equivalent to or greater than the
level that would be obtained in the absence of the exemption.

DATES: This exemption is effective April 15, 2019 and expires April 15,
2024.

ADDRESSES:
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to www.regulations.gov at any time or visit Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., ET, Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The on-line Federal Docket Management System
(FDMS) is available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year.
    Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT
posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information
the commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.dot.gov/privacy.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Pearlie Robinson, FMCSA Driver and
Carrier Operations Division; Office of Carrier, Driver and Vehicle
Safety Standards; Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. Email: [email protected]. If you
have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, contact
Docket Services, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation

Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to www.regulations.gov and insert
the docket number, ``FMCSA-2018-0347 in the ``Keyword'' box and click
``Search.'' Next, click the ``Open Docket Folder'' button and choose
the document to review. If you do not have access to the internet, you
may view the docket online by visiting the Docket Management Facility
in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the DOT West Building, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

II. Legal Basis

    FMCSA has authority under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 to grant
exemptions from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations. FMCSA
must publish a notice of each exemption request in the Federal Register
(49 CFR 381.315(a)). The Agency must provide the public an opportunity
to inspect the information relevant to the application, including

any safety analyses that have been conducted. The Agency must also
provide an opportunity for public comment on the request.
    The Agency reviews the safety analyses and the public comments, and
determines whether granting the exemption would likely achieve a level
of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be
achieved by the current regulation (49 CFR 381.305). The decision of
the Agency must be published in the Federal Register (49 CFR
381.315(b)) with the reason for the grant or denial, and, if granted,
the specific person or class of persons receiving the exemption, and
the regulatory provision or provisions from which exemption is granted.
The notice must also specify the effective period of the exemption (up
to 5 years), and explain the terms and conditions of the exemption. The
exemption may be renewed (49 CFR 381.300(b)).

Request for Exemption

    Navistar has applied for an exemption for Jerome Douay from 49 CFR
383.23, which prescribes licensing requirements for drivers operating
CMVs in interstate or intrastate commerce. Mr. Douay is unable to
obtain a CDL in any of the U.S. States due to his lack of residency in
the United States. A copy of the application is in Docket No. FMCSA-
2018-0347.
    The exemption would allow Mr. Douay to operate CMVs in interstate
or intrastate commerce to support Navistar field tests designed to meet
future vehicle safety and environmental requirements and to promote
technological advancements in vehicle safety systems and emissions
reductions. Mr. Douay needs to drive Navistar vehicles on public roads
to better understand ``real world'' environments in the U.S. market.
According to Navistar, Mr. Douay will typically drive for no more than
6 hours per day for 2 consecutive days, 50 percent of the test driving
will be on two-lane State highways, and 50 percent will be on
Interstate highways. The driving will consist of no more than 250 miles
per day, for a total of 500 miles during a two-day period on a
quarterly basis. He will in all cases be accompanied by a holder of a
U.S. CDL who is familiar with the routes to be traveled.
    Mr. Douay holds a valid German commercial license, and as explained
by Navistar in its exemption request, the requirements for that license
ensure that, operating under the exemption, he would likely achieve a
level of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be
achieved by the current regulation. Furthermore, according to Navistar,
Mr. Douay is familiar with the operation of CMVs worldwide. Navistar
requests that the exemption cover the maximum allowable duration of 5
years.

IV. Method To Ensure an Equivalent or Greater Level of Safety

    FMCSA has previously determined that the process for obtaining a
German commercial license is comparable to, or as effective as, the
requirements of part 383, and adequately assesses the driver's ability
to operate CMVs in the U.S. Since 2012, FMCSA has granted Daimler
drivers similar exemptions [May 25, 2012 (77 FR 31422); July 22, 2014
(79 FR 42626); March 27, 2015 (80 FR 16511); October 5, 2015 (80 FR
60220); July 12, 2016 (81 FR 45217); July 25, 2016 (81 FR 48496);
August 17, 2017 (82 FR 39151)].

V. Public Comments

    On December 18, 2018, FMCSA published notice of this application
and requested public comments (83 FR 64930). One comment was submitted.
Mr. Michael Millard wrote, in part, ``If the FMCSA approves the
application to allow the German engineer to operate in the US utilizing
the European CDL then the FMCSA should set provisions in the exemption
outlining the driver must possess a valid medical certificate per Part
391, be tested for controlled substance and alcohol per Part 382 and
fully understand Parts 392 through 397.''

VI. FMCSA Decision

    Based upon the merits of this application, including Mr. Douay's
extensive driving experience and safety record, FMCSA has concluded
that the exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is
equivalent to or greater than the level that would be achieved absent
such exemption, in accordance with Sec.  381.305(a).

VII. Terms and Conditions for the Exemption

    FMCSA grants Navistar and Jerome Douay an exemption from the CDL
requirement in 49 CFR 383.23 to allow Mr. Douay to drive CMVs in this
country without a State-issued CDL, subject to the following terms and
conditions: (1) The driver and carrier must comply with all other
applicable provisions of the FMCSRs (49 CFR parts 350-399); (2) the
driver must be in possession of the exemption document and a valid
German commercial license; (3) the driver must be employed by and
operate the CMV within the scope of his duties for Navistar or its
partner MAN; (4) at all times while operating a CMV under this
exemption, the driver must be accompanied by a holder of a U.S. CDL who
is familiar with the routes traveled; (5) Navistar must notify FMCSA in
writing within 5 business days of any accident, as defined in 49 CFR
390.5, involving this driver; and (6) Navistar must notify FMCSA in
writing if this driver is convicted of a disqualifying offense under
Sec.  383.51 or Sec.  391.15 of the FMCSRs.
    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315 and 31136(e), the exemption will
be valid for 5 years unless revoked earlier by the FMCSA. The exemption
will be revoked if: (1) Mr. Douay fails to comply with the terms and
conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption results in a lower level
of safety than was maintained before it was granted; or (3)
continuation of the exemption would be inconsistent with the goals and
objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31315 and 31136.

VIII. Preemption

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315(d), as implemented by 49 CFR
381.600, during the period this exemption is in effect, no State shall
enforce any law or regulation applicable to interstate or intrastate
commerce that conflicts with or is inconsistent with this exemption
with respect to a firm or person operating under the exemption.

    Issued on: April 8, 2019.
Raymond P. Martinez,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2019-07434 Filed 4-12-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register: April 14, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 72)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 19436-19441]
[DOCID:fr14ap06-6]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2002-0241; FRL-8063-5]

Sodium Metasilicate; Amendment to an Exemption From the
Requirement of a Tolerance

AGENCY:  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION:  Final rule.

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

SUMMARY:  This regulation establishes an amendment to an exemption from
the requirement of a tolerance for residues of sodium metasilicate on
all food commodities when applied/used as an insecticide or fungicide
to control or suppress leafhoppers and powdery mildew in accordance
with approved label rates and good agricultural practice. A petition
was submitted to EPA on behalf of Environmentally Safe Systems, Inc.
under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), as amended by
the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA), requesting an exemption
from the requirement of a tolerance. This regulation eliminates the
need to establish a maximum permissible level for residues of sodium
metasilicate.

DATES:  This regulation is effective April 14, 2006. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before June 13, 2006.

ADDRESSES:  To submit a written objection or hearing request follow the
detailed instructions as provided in Unit IX. of the  SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION. EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2002-0241. All documents are
listed on the http://www.regulations.gov web site. (EDOCKET, EPA's electronic

public docket and comment system was replaced on November 25, 2005, by
an enhanced federal-wide electronic docket management and comment
system located at http://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the on-line

instructions.) Although listed in the index, some information is not
publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically in EDOCKET or in hard copy at the
Public Information and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB), Rm. 119,
Crystal Mall 2, 1801 S. Bell St., Arlington, VA. This docket
facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The docket telephone number is (703) 305-
5805.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Raderrio Wilkins, Biopesticides and
Pollution Prevention Division (7511C), Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111)
     Animal production (NAICS code 112)
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311)
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532)
    This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular
entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.

B. How Can I Access Electronic Copies of this Document and Other
Related Information?

    In addition to using EDOCKET (http://www.epa.gov/edocket/), youmay

access this Federal Register document electronically through the EPA
Internet under the ``Federal Register'' listings at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/.
 A frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR part 180

is available at E-CFR Beta Site Two at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr/.

II. Background and Statutory Findings

    In the Federal Register of December 29, 2004 (69 FR 78017) (FRL-
7193-8), EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408(d)(3) of the
FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide
tolerance petition (PP 2E6381) by Interregional Research Project Number
(IR-4), New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station, Technology Center
of New Jersey, 681 U.S. Highway 1 South, North Brunswick, NJ 08902-
3390, on behalf of Environmentally Safe Systems, Inc., P.O. Box 1574
Sanat Ynez, CA 93460. ChemReg International, LLC, 1990 Old Bridge Road,
Suite 201, Lake Ridge, VA 22192, is the current authorized agent acting
on behalf of Environmentally Safe Systems, Inc. The petition requested
that 40 CFR part 180 be amended by establishing an exemption from the
requirement of atolerance for residues of sodium metasilicate. This
notice included a summary of the petition prepared by the petitioner
ChemReg International, LLC on behalf of Environmentally Safe Systems,
Inc. There were no comments received in response to the notice of
filing.
    Since the IR-4's submission of this petition, EPA has promulgated a
regulation establishing an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance for sodium metasilicate at 40 CFR 180.1237. That exemption
establishes an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for
residues of sodium metasilicate ``when used as plant desiccants, so
long as the metasilicate does not exceed 4% by weight in aqueous
solution.'' Because IR-4's petition requested an exemption from the
requirement for a tolerance for sodium metasilicate when used as an
insecticide and fungicide, the current exemption does not cover the
petitioned uses and must be amended to include them.
    Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of the FFDCA allows EPA to establish an
exemption from the requirement for a tolerance (the legal limit for a
pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA determines that
the exemption is ``safe.'' Section 408(c)(2)(A)(ii) of the FFDCA
defines``safe'' to mean that ``there is a reasonable certainty that no
harm will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical
residue, including all anticipated dietary exposures and all other
exposures for which there is reliable information.'' This includes
exposure through drinking water and in residential settings, but does
not include occupational exposure. Pursuant to section 408(c)(2)(B), in
establishing or maintaining in effect an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance, EPA must take into account the factors set forth in
section 408(b)(2)(C), which require EPA to give special consideration
to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide chemical residue
in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there is a reasonable
certainty that no harm will result to infants and children from
aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. . . .''
Additionally, section 408(b)(2)(D) of the FFDCA requires that the
Agency consider ``available information concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues'' and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
    EPA performs a number of analyses to determine the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide residues. First, EPA determines the
toxicity of pesticides. Second, EPA examines exposure to the pesticide
through food, drinking water, and through other exposures that occur as
a result of pesticide use in residential settings.

III. Toxicological Profile

    Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D) of the FFDCA, EPA has reviewed
the available scientific data and other relevant information in support
of this action and considered its validity, completeness, and
reliability and the relationship of this information to human risk. EPA
has also considered available information concerning the variability of
the sensitivities of major identifiable subgroups of consumers,
including infants and children.
    Sodium metasilicate is prepared by fusing sand (silicon
dioxide,SiO2) and soda ash (NaCO3). Sand or
silicon dioxide is comprised of silica, which is one of the most
abundant oxide materials in the earth's crust. Silica occurs commonly
in nature as sandstone, silica sand or quartzite. It is the starting
material for the production of silicate glasses and ceramics. It can
exist in an amorphous form (vitreous silica) or in a variety of
crystalline forms. Often it will occur as a non-crystalline oxidation
product on the surface of silicon or silicon compounds. Silicon is
widely distributed in the environment, and is present in the form of
sand on all beaches.
    Sodium metasilicate is a corrosive alkaline material commercially
available in three forms (anhydrous, pentahydrate or nonahydrate
containing 0, 5 or 9 water molecules in its crystal structures,
respectively). In its pure form sodium metasilicate is corrosive to
skin and eyes, and is a severe irritant to the upper respiratory tract.
It may cause burns of the mouth, throat and stomach. This tolerance
exemption covers all three forms of sodium metasilicate because all
three forms are soluble in water, and thus in aqueous dilutions at
2.41%, which is the concentration proposed for pesticide products used
as insecticides and fungicides, the toxicity would be the same. For
this reason, unless otherwise specified in this document, whenever the
term sodium metasilicate is used in this document, it refers to all
three forms of sodium metasilicate.
    Sodium metasilicate is widely used in cosmetics, hair and skin
products, detergents, and a variety of cleaning products. It is also an
active ingredient

in insecticides, fungicides and antimicrobial pesticides at
concentrations up to 4%, and its primary modes of action include
abrasion and dessication of the targeted pests. The pentahydrate
(Na2SiO35H20) is classified by the
Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as ``Generally Recognized as Safe''
(GRAS, indirect food ingredient) for use in washing mixtures for fruits
and vegetables, in sanitizing solutions on food-contact surfaces, and
other uses. Residues of the pentahydrate form, when used in fruit and
vegetable washes, are expected to be orders of magnitude less than the
estimated daily dietary consumption of 20-30 milligrams (mg) silica
from natural sources and drinking water. Silica (also known as silicon
dioxide, SiO2, or silicon) is a degradation product of the
pentahydrate form of sodium metasilicate, which is neutralized by
stomach acid after oral ingestion to form silicic acid
(H2SiO3). Silicic acid is readily absorbed and distributed
throughout the body where it may be further metabolized to silicon
dioxide. Silicon is incorporated into tissues as an essential trace
element, and is especially important in bone growth and development in
poultry and livestock. Silica is also used as a food additive,
primarily as a flow agent in powdered foods, or to absorb water.
    The toxicological data to support the request to amend the
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for sodium metasilicate
is comprised of published information on all three forms of sodium
metasilicate and related silicon-containing compounds. Silicon dioxide
is the focus of many of the studies considered by the Agency since it
is a metabolite of sodium metasilicate pentahydrate after oral
ingestion and is an essential trace element in the diet.
    1. Acute oral toxicity data (MRID 46050902) for the anhydrous form
of sodium metasilicate in rats was classified Toxicity Category III,
due to gastrointestinal irritation and corrosion at doses great than or
equal to 1,000 mg of the active ingredient per kilogram (kg) body
weight. The alkalinity (pH of 12) of the test material would be
expected to cause these gastrointestinal effects and is consistent with
the known irritation and corrosivity of high doses (such as the level
tested in this study) for sodium metasilicate. There were no effects
noted in a second acute oral toxicity study (OPPTS Harmonized Guideline
870.1100; MRID 46202005) with rats given 5,000 mg of a test material
containing only 2.41% sodium metasilicate (approximately 120 mg) per kg
body weight. The test material is classified as Toxicity Category IV
for acute oral toxicity, and demonstrates that a dilution of the active
ingredient to a level that is comparable to concentration of sodium
metasilicate required in the proposed pesticidal uses for control of
leafhoppers and powdery mildew (eliminates the potential of the active
ingredient to cause acute toxic effects).
    2. Environmentally Safe Systems, Inc. requested waivers based on
submitted reviews of publicly available scientific literature (MRID
46050902) for the following required studies on the technical grade of
the active ingredient:
    i. OPP Guideline 152.17--Genotoxicity. Genetic toxicity assays
considered from the submitted review of published scientific literature
included microbial point mutation assays with sodium metasilicate,
silicic acid, and silicon dioxide. None of these substances
demonstrated mutagenic activity in three bacterial test species.
    ii. OPP Guideline 152.20--Subchronic, 90-day feeding. Subchronic
toxicity data summarized from published literature on silicon dioxide
demonstrated adverse effects at high oral doses in rats, mice and dogs
without determining no observed adverse effect levels (NOAEL) in these
test species. An 800 mg/kg body weight/day dose level administered
orally to dogs for 6 months was reported to have kidney effects, which
were not observed after only 4 weeks. These results indicate that
amounts ofSiO2 exceeding the natural demand for the
essential trace element silicon are excreted via the kidneys and can
have effects there after an extended period of exposure. Therefore,
longer exposures to repeated, high oral doses increase the potential
for adverse effects in this test species. The report on the effects in
dogs also indicated that kidney function was not adversely affected by
the microscopic changes noted in the organ.
    Chronic toxicity. The summary review of the published literature
indicated that silicon dioxide (SiO2) was fed to rats and
mice at dietary levels up to 50,000 parts per million (ppm) (5% of the
diet; approximately 2,500 and 7,500 mg/kg/day for rats and mice,
respectively) for 2 years. The only effect noted was a significant
reduction in body weight at the highest dose at the 10-week point of
the mouse study, which continued throughout the rest of the test, which
is likely attributable to the high percentage of silica in the daily
diet of the test animals. No adverse effects were observed in rats.
    iii. OPP Guideline 152.23--Teratogenicity. The published scientific
literature describes silicon as essential for growth and development
the skeleton, hair and feathers in rats, chicks, and other animals.
Although no developmental toxicity studies were submitted, publicly
available literature provided information on the effects on
reproduction for sodium silicate (``soluble silica'' expressed also as
silicon dioxide). In that study, sodium silicate was given in drinking
water to rats for up to 180 days (120 and 240 mg/kg body weight/day at
the beginning of the study when the rats were 3 weeks old, and 72 and
144 mg/kg/day by the end of the study, which is the calculated dose
based on their growth to adults during the study). A decrease in
numbers of live offspring at birth and at weaning was noted; however, a
conclusion cannot be made that the silicates actually caused
reproductive toxicity. The conditions of the study were inappropriate
for normal mating and nurturing behaviors in the test animals. The use
of wire-bottom cages would allow escape, illness or injury of the
offspring, due to the absence of nesting materials for proper nurturing
and heat retention, thus compounding the association of reproductive
effects with silicate intake. Based on the alkaline nature of sodium
metasilicate, when ingested it is neutralized by the stomach acid pH
(less than 2), which greatly reduces it solubility by forming polymeric
silicic acid, and thus the actual absorption of sodium metasilicate
into the blood and tissues of the body is physically limited. This is
demonstrated by the lack of significant effects on the body weights of
the treated rats during the non-reproduction phase of the published
study after dosing with soluble silica at the 72 mg/kg/day dose level.
Since dietary exposure results in minimal absorption into body tissues,
the Agency does not anticipate developmental or reproductive risks from
the use, at 2.41% of sodium metasilicate as an insecticide and
fungicide on growing crops.

IV. Aggregate Exposures

    In examining aggregate exposure, section 408 of the FFDCA directs
EPA to consider available information concerning exposures from the
pesticide residue in food and all other non-occupational exposures,
including drinking water from ground water or surface water and
exposure through pesticide use in gardens, lawns, or buildings
(residential and other indoor uses).

A. Dietary Exposure

    1. Food. Sodium metasilicate is generally recognized as safe by the
FDA

for use as a wash for fruits and vegetables. According to FDA findings,
the residues from this use are expected to be orders of magnitude less
than the estimated daily intake of 20-30 mg silica(SiO2)
from natural sources and drinking water. The submitted summary of
information on sodium metasilicate (MRID 46050902) also indicated that
the FDA has established maximum permissible concentrations of sodium
metasilicate in potable water, fruits and vegetables at 16.0 ppm and
300 ppm, respectively.
    There are a number of factors that inform EPA's conclusion that
there is not likely to be much dietary exposure. First, sodium
metasilicate neutralizes and breaks down under acidic conditions such
as that found in the digestive tract. Second, further dilution by tank
mixing with water of a pesticide product containing the active
ingredient containing only 2.41% or less of sodium metasilicate by
weight before foliar application reduces the amount of active
ingredient that will be on the crop. These factors taken together
significantly reduce the potential for dietary exposure from its
pesticidal uses. Further, if the active ingredient is applied to
growing crops at higher rates, the result is abrasion and dessication
of the food crops. Therefore, good agricultural practices dictate that
the amount of sodium metasilicate used be limited to low concentrations
which happen to be appropriate for the intended pesticidal uses. Given
the use dilutions and other good agricultural practices as required on
product labels, the likely dietary exposures to sodium metasilicate
from the pesticidal uses are expected to be equal to or even less than
levels recommended by the FDA for fruit and vegetable washes.
    2. Drinking water exposure. Sodium metasilicate residues in
drinking water are expected to be minimal from its use as a pesticide,
especially when compared to the ubiquity of naturally occurring forms
of silicon dioxide in the environment, and the widespread use of sodium
metasilicate in dishwashing soaps, other soaps, and detergents. As
mentioned above, pesticide products containing 2.41% or less of sodium
metasilicate are diluted at least 10 times before foliar application,
and are not likely to exceed the level recommended for potable water
(16 ppm).

B. Other Non-Occupational Exposure

    1. Dermal exposure. Non-occupational dermal exposures to sodium
metasilicate when used as a pesticide are expected to be negligible
because it is limited to agricultural use.
    2. Inhalation exposure. Non-occupational inhalation exposures to
sodium metasilicate when used as a pesticide are expected to be
negligible because it is limited to agricultural use.

V. Cumulative Effects

    Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of the FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider the ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
    EPA does not have available data to determine whether sodium
metasilicate has a common mechanism of toxicity with any other
substances. The mode of action as a contact insecticide and fungicide
is considered by the Agency as a non-toxic mode of action on the target
pest species. Further, sodium metasilicate does not appear to produce
any toxic metabolites. Therefore, for the purpose of this tolerance
exemption action, EPA has not assumed that sodium metasilicate has a
common mechanism of toxicity with other substances. For information
regarding EPA's efforts to determine which chemicals have a common
mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the cumulative effects of such
chemicals, refer to the policy statement released by EPA's Office of
Pesticide Programs concerning common mechanism determinations and
procedures for cumulating effect from substances found to have a common
mechanism on EPA's website at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative/.

VI. Determination of Safety for U.S. Population, Infants and Children

    1. U.S. population. The Agency has determined that there is
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregated exposure
to residues of sodium metasilicate to the U.S. population. This
includes all anticipated dietary exposures and other exposures for
which there is reliable information. The Agency arrived at this
conclusion based on the anticipated low acute exposure estimates from
its pesticidal use, the low mammalian toxicity in its diluted form, the
widespread use in the human diet, and that sodium metasilicate is
considered GRAS under 21 CFR 184.1769a and is permitted to be added
directly to food for human consumption.
    2. Infants and children. FFDCA section 408 provides that EPA shall
apply an additional tenfold margin of exposure for infants and children
in the case of threshold effects. Margins of exposure are often
referred to as uncertainty or safety factors, and are used to account
for potential prenatal and postnatal toxicity and any lack of
completeness of the data base. Based on available data and other
information, EPA may determine that a different margin of exposure will
define a level of concern for infants and children or that a margin of
exposure approach is not appropriate. Based on all the available
information the Agency reviewed on sodium metasilicate, including a
lack of threshold effects, the Agency concluded that sodium
metasilicate, in its diluted form, is practically non-toxic to mammals,
including infants and children. Since there are no effects of concern,
the provision requiring an additional margin of safety does not apply.

VII. Other Considerations

A. Endocrine Disruptors

    Based on available data, no endocrine system-related effects have
been identified with consumption of sodium metasilicate. In addition,
there is no evidence to suggest that sodium metasilicate functions in a
manner similar to any known hormone.

B. Analytical Method(s)

    The Agency proposes to establish an amendment to the exemption from
the requirement of a tolerance without any numerical limitation for
residues since it has determined that residues resulting from the
pesticidal uses of sodium metasilicate would be so low as to be
indistinguishable from the naturally occurring silicates that are
ubiquitous in the environment.

C. Codex Maximum Residue Level

    There are no codex maximum residue levels established for residues
of sodium metasilicate.

VIII. Conclusions

    An exemption from the requirement for a tolerance is appropriate
because of the low dietary exposure likely to result from the
pesticidal use of sodium metasilicate, the nature of its mode of action
on the targeted pests, the metabolism of the active ingredient to other
forms of silicon that is needed for growth and development in animals,
and its moderate to low oral toxicity in diluted formulations
(necessary to prevent damage to crops while maintaining effectiveness
as a pesticide).

IX. Objections and Hearing Requests

    Under section 408(g) of the FFDCA, as amended by the FQPA, any
person may file an objection to any aspect of this

regulation and may also request a hearing on those objections. The EPA
procedural regulations which govern the submission of objections and
requests for hearings appear in 40 CFR part 178. Although the
procedures in those regulations require some modification to reflect
the amendments made to the FFDCA by the FQPA, EPA will continue to use
those procedures, with appropriate adjustments, until the necessary
modifications can be made. The new section 408(g) of the FFDCA provides
essentially the same process for persons to ``object'' to a regulation
for an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance issued by EPA
under new section 408(d) of the FFDCA, as was provided in the old
sections 408 and 409 of the FFDCA. However, the period for filing
objections is now 60 days, rather than 30 days.

A. What Do I Need to Do to File an Objection or Request a Hearing?

    You must file your objection or request a hearing on this
regulation in accordance with the instructions provided in this unit
and in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2002-0241 in the subject line on
the first page of your submission. All requests must be in writing, and
must be mailed or delivered to the Hearing Clerk on or before June 13,
2006.
    1. Filing the request. Your objection must specify the specific
provisions in the regulation that you object to, and the grounds for
the objections (40 CFR 178.25). If a hearing is requested, the
objections must include a statement of the factual issues(s) on which a
hearing is requested, the requestor's contentions on such issues, and a
summary of any evidence relied upon by the objector (40 CFR 178.27).
Information submitted in connection with an objection or hearing
request may be claimed confidential by marking any part or all of that
information as CBI.Information so marked will not be disclosed except
in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. A copy of the
information that does not contain CBI must be submitted for inclusion
in the public record. Information not marked confidential may be
disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice.
    Mail your written request to: Office of the Hearing Clerk (1900L),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001. You may also deliver your request to the
Office of the Hearing Clerk in Suite 350, 1099 14th St., NW.,
Washington, DC 20005. The Office of the Hearing Clerk is open from 8
a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the Office of the Hearing Clerk is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    2. Copies for the Docket. In addition to filing an objection or
hearing request with the Hearing Clerk as described in Unit VIII.A.,
you should also send a copy of your request to the PIRIB for its
inclusion in the official record that is described in ADDRESSES. Mail
your copies, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2002-0241, to:
Public Information and Records Integrity Branch, Information Technology
and Resource Management Division (7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001. In person or by courier, bring a copy to the
location of the PIRIB described inADDRESSES. You may also send an
electronic copy of your request via e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Please use an ASCII file format and avoid the use of special characters
and any form of encryption. Copies of electronic objections and hearing
requests will also be accepted on disks in WordPerfect 6.1/8.0 or ASCII
file format. Do not include any CBI in your electronic copy. You may
also submit an electronic copy of your request at many Federal
Depository Libraries.

B. When Will the Agency Grant a Request for a Hearing?

    A request for a hearing will be granted if the Administrator
determines that the material submitted shows the following: There is a
genuine and substantial issue of fact; there is a reasonable
possibility that available evidence identified by the requestor would,
if established resolve one or more of such issues in favor of the
requestor, taking into account uncontested claims or facts to the
contrary; and resolution of the factual issues(s) in the manner sought
by the requestor would be adequate to justify the action requested (40
CFR 178.32).

X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This final rule establishes an amendment to an exemption from the
tolerance requirement under section 408(d) of the FFDCA in response to
a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) has exempted these types of actions from review under Executive
Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and Review (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993). Because this rule has been exempted from review under
Executive Order 12866 due to its lack of significance, this rule is not
subject to Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355,
May 22, 2001). This final rule does not contain any information
collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., or impose any enforceable duty or
contain any unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Public Law 104-4). Nor
does it require any special considerations under Executive Order 12898,
entitled Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994);
or OMB review or any Agency action under Executive Order 13045,
entitled Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and
Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not
involve any technical standards that would require Agency consideration
of voluntary consensus standards pursuant to section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA),
Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). Since
tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis of a
petition under section 408(d) of the FFDCA, such as the amendment to
the exemption in this final rule, do not require the issuance of a
proposed rule, the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) do not apply. The Agency hereby certifies that
this rule will not have a significant negative economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. In addition, the Agency has
determined that this action will not have a substantial direct effect
on 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, as specified in Executive Order 13132,
entitled Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). Executive Order
13132 requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.''
    ``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.'' This final
rule

directly regulates growers, food processors, food handlers and food
retailers, not States. This action does not alter the relationships or
distribution of power and responsibilities established by Congress in
the preemption provisions of section 408(n)(4) of the FFDCA. For these
same reasons, the Agency has determined that this rule does not have
any ``tribal implications'' as described in Executive Order 13175,
entitled Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments
(65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000). Executive Order 13175, requires EPA to
develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input
by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have
tribal implications.`` ``Policies that have tribal implications'' is
defined in the Executive Order to include regulations that have
``substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal Government and the Indian tribes, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes.'' This rule will not have substantial
direct effects on tribal governments, 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,
as specified in Executive Order 13175. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does
not apply to this rule.

XI. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of this final rule in the Federal Register. This final
rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

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

    Dated: March 30, 2006.
Janet L. Andersen,
Director, Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

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

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

0
2. Section 180.1237 is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  180.1237   Sodium metasilicate; exemption from the requirement of
a tolerance.

    (a) An exemption from the requirement of a tolerance is established
for residues of sodium metasilicate in or on all food commodities when
used in accordance with approved label rates and good agricultural
practices as a plant desiccant, so long as the sodium metasilicate does
not exceed 4% by weight in aqueous solution.
    (b) An exemption from the requirement of a tolerance is established
for residues of sodium metasilicate in or on all food commodities when
used in accordance with approved label rates and good agricultural
practices as an insecticide and fungicide, so long as the sodium
metasilicate does not exceed 2.41% by weight in aqueous solution.

[FR Doc. 06-3549 Filed 4-13-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register: June 8, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 108)]
[Notices]
[Page 27209-27211]
[DOCID:fr08jn09-112]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 28755; File No. 812-13650]

WisdomTree Investments, Inc., et al.; Notice of Application

June 1, 2009.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').

ACTION: Notice of application to amend: (1) A prior order under section
6(c) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (``Act'') for an exemption
from sections 2(a)(32), 5(a)(1), 22(d), 22(e), and 24(d) of the Act and
rule 22c-1 under the Act, under sections 6(c) and 17(b) of the Act for
an exemption from sections 17(a)(1) and 17(a)(2) of the Act, and under
section 12(d)(1)(J) for an exemption from sections 12(d)(1)(A) and
12(d)(1)(B) of the Act;\1\ and (2) a prior order under section 6(c) of
the Act, for an exemption from sections 2(a)(32), 5(a)(1) and 22(d) of
the Act and rule 22c-1 under the Act, under sections 6(c) and 17(b) of
the Act for an exemption from sections 17(a)(1) and 17(a)(2) of the
Act, and under section 12(d)(1)(J) of the Act exempting certain
transactions from sections 12(d)(1)(A) and 12(d)(1)(B) of the Act.\2\

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

    \1\ WisdomTree Investments, Inc., et al., Investment Company Act
Release Nos. 27324 (May 18, 2006) (notice) and 27391 (June 12, 2006)
(order), as amended by Investment Company Act Release Nos. 27976
(September 21, 2007) (notice) and 28015 (October 17, 2007) (order)
(together, the ``Index Order'').
    \2\ WisdomTree Trust, et al., Investment Company Act Release
Nos. 28147 (February 6, 2008) (notice) and 28174 (February 27, 2008)
(order) (the ``Active Order'' and together with the Index Order,
collectively ``Prior Orders''). The Prior Orders, among other
things: (i) Permitted registered management investment companies and
unit investment trusts that are not advised or sponsored by their
investment adviser or an entity controlling, controlled by or under
common control with their investment adviser, and not part of the
same ``group of investment companies'' as defined in section
12(d)(1)(G)(ii) of the Act as the Trust (``Acquiring Funds''), to
acquire shares of the Funds (defined below) beyond the limits of
section 12(d)(1)(A) of the Act; (ii) permitted each Fund and/or a
broker to sell shares to an Acquiring Fund beyond the limits of
section 12(d)(1)(B); and (iii) granted relief from sections 17(a)(1)
and (2) to permit each Fund to sell its shares to, and redeem its
shares from, an Acquiring Fund (``Prior 12(d)(1) Relief'').

Summary of Application:  Applicants request an order (``Order'') to
amend the Prior Orders to modify a condition so that Acquiring Funds
may rely on the Prior Orders to invest in the WisdomTree India Earnings
Fund (``India Fund'') and additional series of the WisdomTree Trust
(``Future Funds'') that invest all of their respective assets in
wholly-owned subsidiaries as described in the application. Applicants
also seek to amend the Index Order by deleting the relief granted from
the requirements of section 24(d) of the Act and revising related terms
and conditions of the applications for the Index Order (``Index
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applications'').

Applicants:  WisdomTree Investments, Inc. (``WTI''), WisdomTree Asset
Management, Inc. (the ``Advisor''), and WisdomTree Trust (``Trust'').

Filing Dates:  The application was filed on April 3, 2009 and amended
on April 22, 2009, and May 26, 2009.

Hearing or Notification of Hearing:  An order granting the requested
relief will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing.
Interested persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's
Secretary and serving applicants with a copy of the request, personally
or by mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by
5:30 p.m. on June 26, 2009, and should be accompanied by proof of
service on applicants, in the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a
certificate of service. Hearing requests should state the nature of the
writer's interest, the reason for the request, and the issues
contested. Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing may request
notification by writing to the Commission's Secretary.

ADDRESSES: Secretary, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. Applicants: 48 Wall Street,
Suite 1100, New York, NY 10005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara T. Heussler, Senior Counsel,
at

(202) 551-6990, or Michael W. Mundt, Assistant Director, at (202) 551-
6820 (Division of Investment Management, Office of Investment Company
Regulation).

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

Applicants' Representations

    1. The Trust, a Delaware statutory trust registered under the Act
as an open-end management investment company, is organized as a series
fund with multiple series (the ``Funds''). WTI, a Delaware corporation
with its principal offices in New York City, is the sole shareholder of
the Advisor. WTI develops and maintains the proprietary stock index
that serves as the basis for the India Fund. The Advisor is a Delaware
corporation that is registered as an investment adviser under the
Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as amended (``Advisers Act''). The
Advisor, or an entity controlled by or under common control with the
Advisor, will advise any Future Funds. BNY Investment Advisors (the
``Subadvisor'') is registered as an investment adviser under the
Advisers Act and serves as the subadvisor to the India Fund and its
wholly-owned subsidiary, the WisdomTree India Investment Portfolio
(``India Portfolio''). Any subadvisor for a Future Fund will be
registered as an investment adviser under the Advisers Act and will not
otherwise be an affiliated person of the Trust, the Advisor, or WTI.
ALPS Distributors, Inc., a broker-dealer registered under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, acts as distributor and principal
underwriter of the India Fund and may perform such services for any
Future Funds.
    2. The investment objective of the India Fund is to provide
investment results that correspond generally to the price and yield
performance, before fees and expenses, of its underlying index, the
WisdomTree India Earnings Index (``Underlying Index''). The Underlying
Index measures the performance of companies incorporated, listed and
traded in India that are eligible for foreign investment and that meet
specified liquidity and other criteria developed by WTI. The India Fund
operates through the India Portfolio, a wholly-owned subsidiary
organized in the Republic of Mauritius, in order to take advantage of
favorable tax treatment by the Indian government pursuant to a taxation
treaty between India and Mauritius.\3\ In seeking to achieve its
investment objective, the India Fund invests all or substantially all
of its assets in the India Portfolio. The India Portfolio invests
directly in equity securities listed and traded in India using a
``representative sampling'' strategy with respect to its Underlying
Index. Using this approach, the India Portfolio invests in a
significant number of the component securities (``Component
Securities'') of the Underlying Index, but usually not all the
Component Securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The tax treaty between India and Mauritius exempts corporate
residents of Mauritius from the Indian capital gains tax and enables
them to pay a reduced dividend withholding tax.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. The applicants state that at least 95% of the India Portfolio's
total assets (exclusive of collateral held from securities lending) are
invested in the Component Securities of its Underlying Index. The India
Portfolio is treated by the Trust as a ``pass-through'' entity for
financial reporting and tax purposes, which means that the portfolio
investments of the India Portfolio are treated as investments of the
India Fund for financial reporting and tax purposes. By treating the
India Portfolio as a pass-through entity, the India Fund complies with
(and any Future Fund will comply with) the representation in the
applications for the Index Order to invest at least 80% of its total
assets in Component Securities and investments that have economic
characteristics that are substantially identical to the economic
characteristics of the Component Securities of its Underlying Index.
    4. The Prior 12(d)(1) Relief is subject to a condition that
effectively prevents an Acquiring Fund from investing in a Fund if the
Fund invests in another investment company in excess of the limits of
section 12(d)(1)(A) of the Act.\4\ The India Fund currently invests in
a wholly-owned subsidiary, India Portfolio, in excess of the limits of
section 12(d)(1)(A) in reliance on certain no-action positions of the
staff.\5\ The applicants seek to amend Condition 18 of the Prior Orders
so the Acquiring Funds may invest in the India Fund and in Future Funds
that invest their respective assets in a wholly-owned subsidiary in a
manner substantially similar to the India Fund.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Condition 18 of the Index Order and condition 12 of the
Active Order (collectively, ``Condition 18'') state that: No Fund
will acquire securities of any other investment company or company
relying on Section 3(c)(1) or 3(c)(7) of the 1940 Act in excess of
the limits contained in Section 12(d)(1)(A) of the Act.
    \5\ Applicants note that the Commission staff has permitted an
open-end investment company to utilize a pass through investment
vehicle in order to obtain favorable tax treatment without violating
Section 12(d)(1) of the Act. See South Asia Portfolio, (1997 WL
107157) (Pub. avail. Mar. 12, 1997). Applicants represent that the
India Portfolio operates in a manner substantially similar to the
pass through investment vehicle that is the subject of South Asia
Portfolio no-action relief.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. Applicants also seek to amend the Index Order to delete the
relief previously granted from section 24(d) of the Act. In addition,
applicants seek to amend the terms and conditions of the applications
for the Prior Orders (``Prior Applications'') to provide that all
representations and conditions contained in the Prior Applications and
the current application that require a Fund to disclose particular
information in the Fund's prospectus (``Prospectus'') and/or annual
report shall be effective with respect to the Fund until the time that
the Fund complies with the disclosure requirements adopted by the
Commission in Investment Company Act Release No. 28584 (Jan. 13, 2009)
(``Summary Prospectus Rule''). Applicants state that such amendment is
warranted because the Commission's amendments to Form N-1A with regard
to exchange-traded funds as part of the Summary Prospectus Rule reflect
the Commission's view with respect to the appropriate types of
prospectus and annual report disclosures for an exchange-traded fund.

Applicants' Legal Analysis

    1. Section 12(d)(1)(J) of the Act provides that the Commission may
exempt any person, security, or transaction, or any class or classes of
persons, securities or transactions, from any provision of section
12(d)(1) of the Act if the exemption is consistent with the public
interest and the protection of investors. Because the India Portfolio
invests up to 100% of its assets in securities issued by Indian
companies, applicants state that the India Portfolio could be viewed as
an investment company as defined in section 3(a) of the Act.\6\
Therefore, the India Fund's investment in the India Portfolio could be
viewed as causing the India Fund to

fail to comply with Condition 18 of the Prior Orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Section 3(a)(1) defines an ``investment company'' as any
issuer that is or holds itself out as being engaged primarily, or
proposes to engage primarily, in the business of investing,
reinvesting, or trading in securities. Section 3(a)(1)(C) includes
in the definition of an ``investment company'' any issuer that is
engaged or proposes to engage in the business of investing,
reinvesting, owning, holding, or trading in securities, and owns or
proposes to acquire investment securities having a value exceeding
40% of the value of such issuer's total assets on an unconsolidated
basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. Applicants state that the concerns that sections 12(d)(1) was
designed to prevent about undue influence, excessive layering of fees
and overly complex structures, are not present in the India Portfolio
and other pass-through investment vehicles used solely for purposes of
achieving favorable tax treatment. Applicants represent that the India
Fund is the sole legal and beneficial owner of the India Portfolio,
thus eliminating any concerns regarding pyramiding of voting control;
the Advisor and Subadvisor direct the portfolio management of both the
India Fund and the India Portfolio, which is a pass-through investment
vehicle, thus eliminating concerns over any undue influence of the
Advisor or Subadvsior; and there is no layering of fees as a result of
the India Fund operating through the India Portfolio. Applicants
further represent that any Future Fund will operate through a wholly-
owned investment vehicle that qualifies for pass-through tax and
accounting treatment in a manner similar to that of the India Fund.
Applicants believe that given the absence of section 12(d)(1) concerns
in this structure, it will not create any additional section 12(d)(1)
concerns if Acquiring Funds are permitted to acquire shares of the
India Fund and any Future Fund subject to the terms and conditions of
the Prior 12(d)(1) Relief, as amended by this application.
    3. Applicants submit that the proposed amendment to Condition 18 of
the Prior Orders addresses the concerns underlying the limits in
section 12(d)(1) of the Act and that the requested exemption is
consistent with the public interest and the protection of investors.
Applicants state that all representations contained in the relevant
Prior Applications relating to the operation of the India Fund will
remain in effect and will apply to any Future Funds.
    Section 24(d) of the Act:
    4. Applicants seek to amend the Index Order to delete the relief
granted from section 24(d) of the Act. Applicants state that the
deletion of the exemption from section 24(d) that was granted in the
Index Order is warranted because the adoption of the Summary Prospectus
Rule should supplant any need by a Fund to use a product description.
The deletion of the relief granted with respect to section 24(d) of the
Act from the Index Order also will result in the deletion of related
discussion in the Index Applications, revision of the Index
Applications to delete references to product descriptions, including in
the conditions, and the deletion of condition 6 to the Index Order.

Conditions

    Applicants agree that any Order of the Commission granting the
requested relief will be subject to the same conditions as those
imposed by the Prior Orders, except for Condition 18 to the Prior
Orders, which will be amended as follows:

    No Fund will acquire securities of any investment company or
company relying on Section 3(c)(1) or 3(c)(7) of the Act in excess
of limits contained in Section 12(d)(1)(A) of the Act, other than
the India Portfolio or any similar wholly-owned subsidiary.

    In addition, with respect to the Index Order, condition 6 will be
deleted and conditions 4 and 7 will be amended as follows: \7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ All representations and conditions contained in this
application and the Prior Applications that require a Fund to
disclose particular information in the Fund's Prospectus and/or
annual report shall remain effective with respect to the Fund until
the time that the Fund complies with the disclosure requirements
contained in the Summary Prospectus Rule.

    4. The Web site for each Fund, which will be publicly accessible
at no charge, will contain the following information, on a per Share
basis, for each Fund: (a) the prior Business Day's NAV and the
reported closing price, and a calculation of the premium or discount
of such price against such NAV; and (b) data in chart format
displaying the frequency distribution of discounts and premiums of
the daily closing price against the NAV, within appropriate ranges,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
for each of the four previous calendar quarters.

    7. Each Fund's Prospectus will clearly disclose that, for purposes
of the Act, Shares are issued by the Funds and that the acquisition of
Shares by investment companies is subject to the restrictions of
section 12(d)(1) of the Act, except as permitted by an exemptive order
that permits registered investment companies to invest in a Fund beyond
the limits of section 12(d)(1), subject to certain terms and
conditions, including that the registered investment company enter into
an agreement with the Fund regarding the terms of the investment.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
pursuant to delegated authority.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-13204 Filed 6-5-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P