[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 192 (Wednesday, October 3, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 60311-60315]
[FR Doc No: 2012-24152]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0029; FRL-9362-5]

Chlorantraniliprole; Pesticide Tolerances

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
chlorantraniliprole in or on multiple commodities which are identified
and discussed later in this document. E.I. DuPont de Nemours and
Company, DuPont Crop Protection, requested these tolerances under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

DATES: This regulation is effective October 3, 2012. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before December 3, 2012,
and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40
CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0029, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution
Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public Reading Room is open
from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202)
566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPP Docket is (703) 305-
5805. Please review the visitor instructions and additional information
about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennifer Urbanski, Registration
Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

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

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

    You may access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA's
tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Government
Printing Office's e-CFR site at http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl.

C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0029 in the subject line on the first
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must
be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before
December 3, 2012. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections
and hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for
inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without
prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing
request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0029, by one of
the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.htm.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance

    In the Federal Register of April 4, 2012 (77 FR 20344) (FRL-9340-
4), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP
1F7954) by E.I. DuPont de Nemours and Company, DuPont Crop Protection,
1007 Market Street, Wilmington, DE 19898. The petition requested that
40 CFR 180.628 be amended by establishing tolerances for residues of
the insecticide chlorantraniliprole,3-bromo-N-[4-chloro-2-methyl-6-
[(methylamino)carbonyl]phenyl]-1-(3-chloro-2-pyridinyl)-1H-pyrazole-5-
carboxamide, in or on oilseed, rapeseed subgroup 20A at 2.0 parts per
million (ppm); oilseed, sunflower subgroup 20B at 2.0 ppm; oilseed,
cottonseed subgroup 20C at 0.3 ppm; soybean aspirated grain fractions
at 300 ppm; vegetable, legume, group 6 at 2.0 ppm; vegetable, foliage
of legume, group 7 at 30 ppm; and forage, vegetable, foliage of legume,
group 7 at 90 ppm. That document referenced a summary of the petition
prepared by E. I. DuPont de Nemours and Company, the registrant, which
is available in the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. Comments were
received on the notice of filing. EPA's response to these comments is
discussed in Unit IV.C.
    Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA has
revised the tolerance associated with aspirated grain fractions to 640
ppm. EPA is also increasing the existing tolerances in cattle, fat;
goat, fat; horse, fat; and sheep, fat to 0.5 ppm. EPA has also
increased the existing tolerances in cattle, meat; goat, meat; horse,
meat; and sheep, meat to 0.1 ppm. The reason for these changes are
explained in Unit IV.D.

III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a
food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure.
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing 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 * *
*''
    Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), and the factors
specified in FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the available
scientific data and other relevant information in support of this
action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a
determination on aggregate exposure for chlorantraniliprole including
exposure resulting from the tolerances established by this action.
EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with
chlorantraniliprole follows.

A. Toxicological Profile

    EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies 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. Chlorantraniliprole is not genotoxic, neurotoxic,
immunotoxic, carcinogenic, or developmentally toxic.
Chlorantraniliprole is not acutely toxic via oral, dermal or inhalation
routes of exposure, and is not an eye or skin irritant nor a dermal
sensitizer. There was only one animal toxicity study (18-month
carcinogenicity study in mice) in the toxicology database which
evidenced any adverse effect of chlorantraniliprole. This study was
used to establish a point of departure (POD), based on hepatocellular
effects, for the chronic dietary exposure scenario. Although
residential and occupational exposure is expected over the short- and
intermediate-term (via the dermal and/or incidental oral route), there
is no hazard expected via these routes/durations, and therefore no risk
associated with these scenarios.
    Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by chlorantraniliprole as well as the no-
observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-
effect-level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at http://www.regulations.gov in document ``Chlorantraniliprole: Human Health
Risk Assessment for Proposed Uses on Oilseeds (Subgroups 20A through C)
and Soybean (Crop group 6 and 7),'' page 16 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OPP-2012-0029.

B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern

    Once a pesticide's toxicological profile is determined, EPA
identifies toxicological POD and levels of concern to use in evaluating
the risk posed by human exposure to the pesticide. For hazards that
have a threshold below which there is no appreciable risk, the
toxicological POD is used as the basis for derivation of reference
values for risk assessment. PODs are developed based on a careful
analysis of the doses in each toxicological study to determine the dose
at which no adverse effects are observed (the NOAEL) and the lowest
dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified (the LOAEL).
Uncertainty/safety factors are used in conjunction with the POD to
calculate a safe exposure level--generally referred to as a population-
adjusted dose (PAD) or a reference dose (RfD)--and a safe margin of
exposure (MOE). For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes that any
amount of exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the Agency
estimates risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of the
adverse effect expected in a lifetime. For more information on the
general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete
description of the risk assessment process, see http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/riskassess.htm.
    A summary of the toxicological endpoints for chlorantraniliprole
used for human risk assessment is discussed in Unit III.B of the final
rule published in the Federal Register of July 27, 2011 (76 FR 44815)
(FRL-8875-5).

C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to chlorantraniliprole, EPA considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all existing chlorantraniliprole
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.628. EPA assessed dietary exposures from
chlorantraniliprole in food as follows:
    i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk
assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological
study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring
as a result of a 1-day or single exposure. No such effects were
identified in the toxicological studies for chlorantraniliprole;
therefore, a quantitative acute dietary exposure assessment is
unnecessary.
    ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the United States
Department of Agriculture (USDA) 1994-1996 and 1998 Continuing Survey
of Food Intake by Individuals (CSFII). As to residue levels in food,
EPA assumed tolerance levels residues and 100% crop treated (CT).
Dietary Risk Evaluation System (DEEM) default processing factors were
used.
    iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that chlorantraniliprole does not pose a cancer risk to
humans. Therefore, a dietary exposure assessment for the purpose of
assessing cancer risk is unnecessary.
    iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) information.
EPA did not use anticipated residue and/or PCT information in the
dietary assessment for chlorantraniliprole. Tolerance level residues
and/or 100% CT were assumed for all food commodities.
    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for chlorantraniliprole in drinking water. These simulation
models take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/
transport characteristics of chlorantraniliprole. Further information
regarding EPA drinking water models used in pesticide exposure
assessment can be found at http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
    Based on the First Index Reservoir Screening Tool (FIRST),
Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling System (PRZM/
EXAMS) and Screening Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-GROW) models,
the estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of
chlorantraniliprole for acute exposures are estimated to be 55.30 parts
per billion (ppb) for surface water and 0.842 ppb for ground water, and
for chronic exposures for cancer and non-

cancer assessments are estimated to be 39.87 ppb for surface water and
0.842 ppb for ground water.
    Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of value 39.87 ppb was used to
assess the contribution to drinking water. No acute dietary risk
assessment was performed because no acute hazard was identified.
    3. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is
used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary
exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control,
termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets). Chlorantraniliprole
is currently registered for the following uses that could result in
residential exposures: Termiticide, ornamentals, and turfgrass. EPA
assessed residential exposure using the following assumptions:
Residential exposure could occur for short-term and intermediate-term
durations; however, due to the lack of toxicity identified for short-
and intermediate-term durations via relevant routes of exposure, no
risk is expected from these exposures. Further information regarding
EPA standard assumptions and generic inputs for residential exposures
may be found at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/trac/science/trac6a05.pdf.
    4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.'' EPA has not found
chlorantraniliprole to share a common mechanism of toxicity with any
other substances, and chlorantraniliprole does not appear to produce a
toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that chlorantraniliprole
does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances. For
information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which chemicals have a
common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the cumulative effects of
such chemicals, see EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.

D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

    1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the Food Quality
Protection Act Safety Factor (FQPA SF). In applying this provision, EPA
either retains the default value of 10X, or uses a different additional
safety factor when reliable data available to EPA support the choice of
a different factor.
    2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. There were no effects on
fetal growth or postnatal development up to the limit dose of 1,000
milligrams/kilogram/day (mg/kg/day) in rats or rabbits in the
development or 2-generation reproduction studies. Additionally, there
were no treatment related effects on the numbers of litters, fetuses
(live or dead), resorptions, sex ratio, or post-implantation loss and
no effects on fetal body weights, skeletal ossification, and external,
visceral, or skeletal malformations or variations.
    3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show the
safety of infants and children would be adequately protected if the
FQPA SF were reduced to 1X. That decision is based on the following
findings:
    i. The toxicity database for chlorantraniliprole is complete.
    ii. There is no indication that chlorantraniliprole is a neurotoxic
chemical and there is no need for a developmental neurotoxicity study
or additional UFs to account for neurotoxicity.
    iii. There is no evidence that chlorantraniliprole results in
increased susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal
developmental studies or in young rats in the 2-generation reproduction
study.
    iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. A poultry feeding study is needed, but the results of the
poultry metabolism study conducted at a feeding level twice the
expected dietary burden and at a duration of 14 days, well in excess of
the mandatory 3 days, are used to provide a conservative estimate of
residues in poultry commodities. The dietary food exposure assessments
were performed based on 100% CT and tolerance-level residues. EPA made
conservative (protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water
modeling used to assess exposure to chlorantraniliprole in drinking
water. EPA used similarly conservative assumptions to assess
postapplication exposure of children as well as incidental oral
exposure of toddlers. These assessments will not underestimate the
exposure and risks posed by chlorantraniliprole.

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

    EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide
exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the
acute PAD (aPAD) and chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer risks, EPA
calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term
risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate food, water,
and residential exposure to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an
adequate MOE exists.
    1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk assessment takes into
account acute exposure estimates from dietary consumption of food and
drinking water. No adverse effect resulting from a single oral exposure
was identified and no acute dietary endpoint was selected. Therefore,
chlorantraniliprole is not expected to pose an acute risk.
    2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
chlorantraniliprole from food and water will utilize 6% of the cPAD for
children 1-2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest
exposure. Based on the explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding
residential use patterns, chronic residential exposure to residues of
chlorantraniliprole is not expected.
    3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into
account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level). Because no
short-term adverse effect was identified, chlorantraniliprole is not
expected to pose a short-term risk.
    4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure
level). Because no intermediate-term adverse effect was identified,
chlorantraniliprole is not expected to pose a intermediate-term risk.
    5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity
studies, chlorantraniliprole is not expected to pose a cancer risk to
humans.

    6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to chlorantraniliprole residues.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    Adequate enforcement methodology (liquid chromatography mass
spectrometry (LC/MS/MS)) is available to enforce the tolerance
expression. The method may be requested from: Chief, Analytical
Chemistry Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft.
Meade, MD 20755-5350; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
B. International Residue Limits

    In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations
Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food
standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain
the reasons for departing from the Codex level.
    The Codex has established MRLs for chlorantraniliprole in or on the
oilseed cottonseed subgroup 20C at 0.3 ppm. This MRL is the same as the
tolerance being established for chlorantraniliprole the oilseed
cottonseed subgroup 20C in the United States by this action.
    The Codex has established MRLs for chlorantraniliprole in or on
meat (fat) at 0.2 ppm. These MRLs are different than the tolerances
being established for chlorantraniliprole in the United States on
cattle, horse, sheep and goat fat (0.5 ppm) by this action. This
results from the differences in treated commodities used in the
livestock dietary exposure calculation and in the methods of diet
calculation. The United States tolerances include more livestock feed
items than Codex. Codex calculates the dietary burden based on the
worst possible case, whereas NAFTA countries utilize a reasonably
balanced diet that considered nutritional needs of livestock.

C. Response to Comments

    The EPA received a comment from a private citizen stating that
pesticides should be banned. The Agency understands the commenter's
concerns and recognizes that some individuals believe that pesticides
should be banned completely. However, under the existing legal
framework provided by section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug and
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) EPA is authorized to establish pesticide
tolerances or exemptions where persons seeking such tolerances or
exemptions have demonstrated that the pesticide meets the safety
standard imposed by that statute.

D. Revisions to Petitioned-for Tolerances

    The petition requested an aspirated grain fractions tolerance of
300 ppm. EPA is establishing a 640 ppm tolerance in aspirated grain
factions based on evaluation of the soybean processing data. A
processing study submitted for the generation of aspirated grain dust
from soybeans provided a processing factor (320) that was used with the
crop group 6 tolerance (2.0 ppm) to obtain a tolerance estimate (320 x
2 = 640 ppm) for aspirated grain fractions. Thus, soybeans with
residues at the tolerance level (2 ppm) would yield aspirated grain
fractions with residues of 640 ppm.
    EPA is increasing the tolerance levels for certain livestock
commodities because of the addition of soybean aspirated grain
fractions as a feed item and the resulting increase in certain
livestock dietary burdens. Previously, aspirated grain fractions (corn)
contributed to the dietary burden; this is now replaced by soybean
aspirated grain fractions which results in a greater dietary
contribution. The beef cattle dietary burden is now elevated from 73
ppm to 110 ppm. This increase in the cattle dietary burden necessitates
an increase in the tolerances of the meat and fat of cattle, sheep,
horses, and goats. The existing tolerances for liver and kidney will
cover the increased dietary exposure of cattle. The milk tolerance is
not affected, because aspirated grain fractions are not a significant
diary cow feed item.

V. Conclusion

    Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of
chlorantraniliprole, 3-bromo-N-[4-chloro-2-methyl-6-
[(methylamino)carbonyl]phenyl]-1-(3-chloro-2-pyridinyl)-1H-pyrazole-5-
carboxamide, in or on the following commodities: oilseed, rapeseed
subgroup 20A at 2.0 ppm; oilseed, sunflower subgroup 20B at 2.0 ppm;
oilseed, cottonseed subgroup 20C at 0.3 ppm; soybean aspirated grain
fractions at 640 ppm; vegetable, legume, group 6 at 2.0 ppm; vegetable,
foliage of legume, group 7, forage at 30 ppm; vegetable, foliage of
legume, group 7, hay at 90 ppm; cattle, goat, horse and sheep, fat at
0.5 ppm, and cattle, goat, horse and sheep, meat at 0.1 ppm. Consistent
with the petitioner's request, EPA is also deleting certain
chlorantraniliprole tolerances that are no longer needed as a result of
the crop group tolerances added by this action.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This final rule establishes tolerances under FFDCA section 408(d)
in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and
Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this final rule has
been exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this final rule
is not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This 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.), nor does it require any
special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerance in this
final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
    This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this

action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or tribal
governments, on the relationship between the national government and
the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government or between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined
that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255,
August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000) do not apply to this final rule. In addition, this final rule
does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as
described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
    This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).

VII. Congressional Review Act

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

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

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

    Dated: September 21, 2012.
Daniel J. Rosenblatt,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

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

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

0
2. Section 180.628 is amended as follows:
0
i. Remove the entries for crambe, seed; grain, aspirated fractions;
hare's ear mustard, seed; jojoba, seed; lesquerella, seed; milkweed,
seed; mustard, seed; oil, radish, seed; poppy, seed; rapeseed, seed;
rose hip, seed; sesame, seed; tallowwood, seed; tea oil plant, seed;
vegetable, foliage of legume, except soybean, subgroup 7A, forage;
vegetable, foliage of legume, except soybean, subgroup 7A, hay; and
vegetable, legume, group 6, except soybeans; from the table in
paragraph (a).
0
ii. Revise the tolerances for cattle, fat; cattle, meat; goat, fat;
goat, meat; horse, fat; horse, meat; sheep, fat; sheep, meat; in the
table in paragraph (a).
0
iii. Add alphabetically entries for cottonseed subgroup 20C, grain,
aspirated grain fractions; rapeseed subgroup 20A; sunflower subgroup
20B; vegetable, legume, group 6; vegetable, foliage of legume, group 7,
forage; and vegetable, foliage of legume, group 7, hay; to the table in
paragraph (a).
0
iv. Remove the entries for soybean, forage, and soybean, hay, from the
table in paragraph (d).
    The added and revised text read as follows:

Sec.  180.628  Chlorantraniliprole; tolerances for residues.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Parts per
                         Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                * * * * *
Cattle, fat................................................          0.5
Cattle, meat...............................................          0.1

                                * * * * *
Cottonseed subgroup 20C....................................          0.3

                                * * * * *
Goat, fat..................................................          0.5
Goat, meat.................................................          0.1

                                * * * * *
Grain, aspirated grain fractions...........................          640

                                * * * * *
Horse, fat.................................................          0.5
Horse, meat................................................          0.1

                                * * * * *
Rapeseed subgroup 20B......................................          2.0

                                * * * * *
Sheep, fat.................................................          0.5
Sheep, meat................................................          0.1

                                * * * * *
Sunflower subgroup 20C.....................................          0.3

                                * * * * *
Vegetable, legume, group 6.................................          2.0
Vegetable, foliage of legume, group 7, forage..............           30
Vegetable, foliage of legume, group 7, hay.................           90

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

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2012-24152 Filed 10-2-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 124 (Thursday, July 1, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 35027-35030]
[FR Doc No: 2021-13988]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0212; Project Identifier 2018-CE-032-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; DG Flugzeugbau GmbH Gliders

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for all

DG Flugzeugbau GmbH Models DG-808C and DG-1000T gliders. This proposed
AD was prompted by mandatory continuing airworthiness information
(MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of another country to
identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The
MCAI describes the unsafe condition as damaged fuel hoses due to
environmental and fatigue deterioration. This proposed AD would require
inspecting the polyurethane (PU) fuel hoses, replacing the PU fuel
hoses if there is damage, and establishing a life limit for the PU fuel
hoses. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on
these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by August 16,
2021.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact DG
Flugzeugbau GmbH, Otto-Lilienthal Weg 2, D-76646 Bruchsal, Germany;
phone: +49 (0)7251 3202-0; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>website:
https://www.dg-flugzeugbau.de/. You may view this service information
at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch,
901 Locust, Kansas City, MO 64106. For information on the availability
of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0212; 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 NPRM, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for Docket
Operations is listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim Rutherford, Aviation Safety
Engineer, General Aviation & Rotorcraft Section, International
Validation Branch, FAA, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, MO 64106;
phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2021-0212; Project Identifier
2018-CE-032-AD'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposal because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact received about this NPRM.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Jim
Rutherford, Aviation Safety Engineer, General Aviation & Rotorcraft
Section, International Validation Branch, FAA, 901 Locust, Room 301,
Kansas City, MO 64106. Any commentary that the FAA receives which is
not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket
for this rulemaking.

Background

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD
2018-0127, dated June 11, 2018 (referred to after this as ``the
MCAI''), to address an unsafe condition on DG Flugzeugbau GmbH Models
DG-808C and DG-1000T gliders. The MCAI states:

    An occurrence was reported where, during accomplishment of a 10
years inspection on a DG-808C powered sailplane, a damaged (broken)
PU [polyurethane] fuel hose was found. The result of subsequent
investigation indicated that the damage mode has features of
environmental and fatigue deterioration. Additionally, it was
determined that similar PU fuel hoses are also installed on other
powered sailplane types of the same manufacturer.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to
reduced or interrupted fuel supply to the engine, consequent loss of
the available power or fire, possibly resulting in reduced control
of the powered sailplane.
    To address this potential unsafe condition, DG-Flugzeugbau GmbH
issued the applicable TN [Technical Note], providing instructions to
inspect the affected parts and replace these with serviceable parts.
Additionally, service life limits were established for those
serviceable parts.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires
repetitive inspections of the affected parts. This [EASA] AD also
requires replacement of the affected parts with serviceable parts
and introduces life limits for serviceable parts.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-
0212.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed DG Flugzeugbau GmbH Technical Note No. 800/46,
Issue 01.a, dated March 7, 2018, for Model DG-808C gliders; and
Technical Note No. 1000/38, Issue 01.a, dated February 15, 2018, for
Model DG-1000T gliders. The service information, as applicable to the
appropriate model glider, specifies inspections of the PU fuel hoses,
replacement of the PU fuel hoses if damage is found during an
inspection, and actions to take when the hoses have reached their life
limit. This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in ADDRESSES.

FAA's Determination

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to
our bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, it has
notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and
service information

referenced above. The FAA is issuing this NPRM after determining the
unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop on
other products of the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements in This NPRM

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in the service information already described, except as discussed under
``Differences Between this Proposed AD and the MCAI.''

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the MCAI

    The MCAI requires replacing any damaged fuel hoses before next
engine operation, while this proposed AD would require replacing
damaged fuel hoses before further flight. Even though use of the engine
is optional and the glider can operate without the engine, the glider
has other electronic equipment installed that could cause arcing and
result in an in-flight fire if there is a fuel leak.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD, if adopted as proposed, would
affect 10 gliders of U.S. registry. The FAA also estimates that it
would take about 2 work-hours per glider to comply with each inspection
required by this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85 per work-
hour.
    Based on these figures, the FAA estimates the inspection cost of
this proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $1,700, or $170 per glider,
each inspection cycle.
    In addition, the FAA estimates that each replacement action
required by this proposed AD would take about 8 work-hours and require
parts costing $500. Based on these figures, the FAA estimates the
replacement cost of this proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $1,180 per
glider.

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

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

DG Flugzeugbau GmbH: Docket No. FAA-2021-0212; Project Identifier
2018-CE-032-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) by August 16, 2021.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to DG Flugzeugbau GmbH Models DG-808C and DG-
1000T gliders, all serial numbers, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 2800, Aircraft Fuel
System.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of another
country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation
product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as damaged
polyurethane (PU) fuel hoses due to environmental and fatigue
deterioration. The FAA is issuing this AD to prevent reduced or
interrupted fuel supply to the engine or fuel leakage. The unsafe
condition, if not addressed, could result in loss of engine power or
in-flight fire.

(f) Definitions

    (1) For purposes of this AD, an ``affected part'' is a PU fuel
hose installed in an airframe fuel system or engine compartment
that:
    (i) Does not meet industrial standard DIN 73379-2A, or
    (ii) Does not meet ISO 7840-A1 without metal shielding.
    (2) For purposes of this AD, a ``serviceable part'' is a PU fuel
hose installed in an airframe fuel system or engine compartment
that:
    (i) Meets industrial standard DIN 73379-2A, or
    (ii) Meets industrial standard ISO 7840-A1 without metal
shielding.

 (g) Inspections for Gliders With An Affected Part Installed

    Within the next 30 days after the effective date of this AD and
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 12 months, visually inspect
each affected part for fissures, kinks, and leaks. For this
inspection, the ignition switch must be turned on to run the
electric fuel pump to demonstrate an operating fuel pressure.
    (1) If a fissure, kink, or leak is found on an affected part
during any inspection required by the introductory language to
paragraph (g) of this AD, before further flight: Replace all
affected parts with unused (zero hours time-in-service (TIS))
serviceable parts by following paragraphs 3 and 4 of the
Instructions in DG Flugzeugbau GmbH Technical Note No. 800/46, Issue
01.a, dated March 7, 2018 (TN No. 800/46), or paragraphs 3 through 5
of the Instructions in DG Technical Note No. 1000/38, Issue 01.a,
dated February 15, 2018 (TN No. 1000/38), as applicable to your
model glider.
    (2) If no fissures, kinks, and leaks are found on all affected
parts during any inspection required by the introductory language to
paragraph (g) of this AD, before each affected part accumulates 6
years since first installation on a glider or within 6 months after
the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later: Replace all
affected parts with unused (zero hours TIS) serviceable parts by
following paragraphs 3 and 4 of the Instructions in TN No. 800/46 or
paragraphs 3 through 5 of the Instructions in TN No. 1000/38, as
applicable to your model glider. If the date of first installation
on a glider is unknown for any affected hose, replace all affected
hoses within 6 months after the effective date of this AD.

(h) Inspections for Gliders With Only Serviceable Parts Installed

    (1) Before or upon accumulating 6 years since first installation
on a glider and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 12 months,
visually inspect each serviceable part for fissures, kinks, and
leaks. For this inspection, the ignition switch must be turned on to
run the electric fuel pump to demonstrate an operating fuel
pressure.
    (2) If a fissure, a kink, or a leak is found during any
inspection required by paragraph (h)(1) of this AD, before further
flight, replace the part with an unused (zero hours TIS) serviceable
part by following paragraphs 3 and 4 of the Instructions in TN No.
800/46 or paragraphs 3 through 5 of the Instructions in TN No. 1000/
38, as applicable to your model glider.

(i) Life Limit

    Before accumulating 10 years since first installation on a
glider and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 10 years, remove
each serviceable part from service and replace with an unused (zero
hours TIS) serviceable part by following paragraphs 3 and 4 of the
Instructions in TN No. 800/46 or paragraphs 3 through 5 of the
Instructions in TN No. 1000/38, as applicable to your model glider.

(j) Parts Installation Prohibition

    As of the effective date of this AD, do not install an affected
part on any glider.

(k) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, International Validation Branch, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the manager of the certification office, send it to the
attention of the person identified in Related Information or email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

(l) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD contact Jim Rutherford,
Aviation Safety Engineer, General Aviation & Rotorcraft Section,
International Validation Branch, FAA, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas
City, MO 64106; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Refer to European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2018-
0127, dated June 11, 2018, for more information. You may examine the
EASA AD in the AD docket on the website at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-
2021-0212.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact DG
Flugzeugbau GmbH, Otto-Lilienthal Weg 2, D-76646 Bruchsal, Germany;
phone: +49 (0)7251 3202-0; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>website:
https://www.dg-flugzeugbau.de/. You may review this referenced
service information at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section,
Operational Safety Branch, 901 Locust, Kansas City, MO 64106. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
(816) 329-4148.

    Issued on June 25, 2021.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-13988 Filed 6-30-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 143 (Monday, July 27, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44405-44406]
[FR Doc No: 2015-18324]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 31721; 812-14413]

BPV Capital Management, LLC and BPV Family of Funds; Notice of
Application

July 21, 2015.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').

ACTION: Notice of an application under section 6(c) of the Investment
Company Act of 1940 (``Act'') for an exemption from section 15(a) of
the Act and rule 18f-2 under the Act, as well as from certain
disclosure requirements in rule 20a-1 under the Act, Item 19(a)(3) of
Form N-1A, Items 22(c)(1)(ii), 22(c)(1)(iii), 22(c)(8) and 22(c)(9) of
Schedule 14A under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Sections 6-
07(2)(a), (b), and (c) of Regulation S-X (``Disclosure Requirements'').
The requested exemption would permit an investment adviser to hire and
replace certain sub-advisers without shareholder approval and grant
relief from the Disclosure Requirements as they relate to fees paid to
the sub-advisers.

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

APPLICANTS: BPV Family of Funds (the ``Trust''), a Delaware statutory
trust registered under the Act as an open-end management investment
company with multiple series, and BPV Capital Management, LLC, a
Delaware limited liability company registered as an investment adviser
under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (``BPV'' or the ``Adviser,''
and, collectively with the Trust, the ``Applicants'').

DATES: Filing Dates: The application was filed January 8, 2015, and
amended on June 10, 2015.

Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An order granting the application
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 August 17, 2015, and should be accompanied by proof of service
on the applicants, in the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a
certificate of service. Pursuant to rule 0-5 under the Act, hearing
requests should state the nature of the writer's interest, any facts
bearing upon the desirability of a hearing on the matter, 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: Michael R. West, BPV
Family of Funds, 9202 South Northshore Drive, Suite 300, Knoxville, TN
37922; and Jeffrey T. Skinner, Esq., Kirkpatrick, Townsend & Stockton
LLP, 1001 W. Fourth Street, Winston-Salem, NC 27101.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Emerson S. Davis, Senior Counsel, at
(202) 551-6868, or Daniele Marchesani, Branch Chief, at<PHONE_NUMBER>
(Division of Investment Management, Chief Counsel's Office).

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>.

Summary of the Application

    1. The Adviser will serve as the investment adviser to the Funds
pursuant to an investment advisory agreement with the Trust (the
``Advisory Agreement'').\1\ The Adviser will provide the Funds with
continuous and comprehensive investment management services subject to
the supervision of, and policies established by, each Fund's board of
trustees (``Board''). The Advisory Agreement permits the Adviser,
subject to the approval of the Board, to delegate to one or more sub-
advisers (each, a ``Sub-Adviser'' and collectively, the ``Sub-
Advisers'') the responsibility to provide the day-to-day portfolio
investment management of each Fund, subject to the supervision and
direction of the Adviser. The primary responsibility for managing the
Funds will remain vested in the Adviser. The Adviser will hire,
evaluate, allocate assets to and oversee the Sub-Advisers, including
determining whether a Sub-Adviser should be terminated, at all times
subject to the authority of the Board.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Applicants request relief with respect to any existing and
any future series of the Trust and any other registered open-end
management company or series thereof that: (a) Is advised by BPV or
its successor or by a person controlling, controlled by, or under
common control with BPV or its successor (each, also an
``Adviser''); (b) uses the manager of managers structure described
in the application; and (c) complies with the terms and conditions
of the application (any such series, a ``Fund'' and collectively,
the ``Funds''). For purposes of the requested order, ``successor''
is limited to an entity that results from a reorganization into
another jurisdiction or a change in the type of business
organization.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. Applicants request an exemption to permit the Adviser, subject
to Board approval, to hire certain Sub-Advisers pursuant to Sub-
Advisory Agreements and materially amend existing Sub-Advisory
Agreements without obtaining the shareholder approval required under
section 15(a) of the Act and rule 18f-2 under the Act.\2\ Applicants
also seek an exemption from the Disclosure Requirements to permit a
Fund to disclose (as both a dollar amount and a percentage of the
Fund's net assets): (a) The aggregate fees paid to the Adviser and any
Affiliated Sub-Adviser; and (b) the aggregate fees paid to Sub-Advisers
other than Affiliated Sub-Advisers (collectively, ``Aggregate Fee
Disclosure''). For any Fund that employs an Affiliated Sub-Adviser, the
Fund will provide separate disclosure of

any fees paid to the Affiliated Sub-Adviser.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The requested relief will not extend to any Sub-Adviser that
is an affiliated person, as defined in section 2(a)(3) of the Act,
of a Fund or the Adviser, other than by reason of serving as a sub-
adviser to one or more of the Funds (``Affiliated Sub-Adviser'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. Applicants agree that any order granting the requested relief
will be subject to the terms and conditions stated in the Application.
Such terms and conditions provide for, among other safeguards,
appropriate disclosure to Fund shareholders and notification about sub-
advisory changes and enhanced Board oversight to protect the interests
of the Funds' shareholders.
    4. Section 6(c) 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 provisions of the Act, or
any rule thereunder, if such relief is necessary or appropriate in the
public interest and consistent with the protection of investors and
purposes fairly intended by the policy and provisions of the Act.
Applicants believe that the requested relief meets this standard
because, as further explained in the Application, the Advisory
Agreements will remain subject to shareholder approval, while the role
of the Sub-Advisers is substantially similar to that of individual
portfolio managers, so that requiring shareholder approval of Sub-
Advisory Agreements would impose unnecessary delays and expenses on the
Funds. Applicants believe that the requested relief from the Disclosure
Requirements meets this standard because it will improve the Adviser's
ability to negotiate fees paid to the Sub-Advisers that are more
advantageous for the Funds.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
under delegated authority.
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-18324 Filed 7-24-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 65 (Monday, April 6, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18316-18319]
[FR Doc No: 2015-07746]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 147

[EPA-HQ-OW-2011-0520; FRL-9924-92-OW]

State of Tennessee Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program;
Primacy Approval

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking
direct final action to approve the State of Tennessee Underground
Injection Control (UIC) Program for primacy to implement and enforce
state regulations for all UIC injection wells located within the state,
except for Class VI and all wells on Indian lands, as required by rule
under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). The Agency determined that
the state's UIC Program is consistent with the provisions of the SDWA
and is as stringent as all applicable federal regulations to prevent
underground injection activities that endanger underground sources of
drinking water.

DATES: This rule is effective on July 6, 2015 without further notice,
unless EPA receives adverse comment by May 6, 2015. If EPA receives
adverse comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal
Register informing the public that the rule will not take effect. For
judicial purposes, this final rule is promulgated as of July 6, 2015.
The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the
rule is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of July 6,
2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-
2011-0520, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
     Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Mail: State of Tennessee; Underground Injection Control
(UIC) Primacy, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460.
     Hand Delivery: Water Docket, EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC)
EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2011-
0520. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in
the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or email. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an email comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov your email address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public
docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    Docket: All supporting documents in the docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Water Docket, EPA/
DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC;
and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, Library 9th Floor,
61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303. The Water Docket
Facility Public Reading Room in Washington, DC, is open from 8:30 a.m.
to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
Public Reading Room telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER> and the
telephone number of the Water Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. The Region 4
Library is open from 8:00 a.m. to 3:45 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the library is (404)
562-8190.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marilyn Ginsberg, Drinking Water
Protection Division, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water (4606M),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:
(202) 564-3754; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or Nancy H.
Marsh, Safe Drinking Water Branch, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303;
telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Why is EPA issuing a direct final rule?

    EPA published this rule without a prior proposed rule because the
Agency views this action as noncontroversial and anticipates no adverse
comment. However, in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of today's Federal
Register, EPA published a separate document that serves as the proposed
rule if the Agency receives adverse comment on this direct final rule.
The Agency will not institute a second comment period on this action.
Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this time. For
further information about commenting

on this rule, see the ADDRESSES section of this document.
    If EPA receives adverse comment, the Agency will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register, informing the public that this
direct final rule will not take effect. The Agency will then address
all public comments in any subsequent final rule based on the proposed
rule.

II. Does this action apply to me?

                           Regulated Entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          North American
                                 Examples of potentially     Industry
            Category                regulated entities    Classification
                                                              System
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State, Local, and Tribal         State, local, and                924110
 Governments.                     tribal governments
                                  that own and operate
                                  Class I, II, III, IV,
                                  and V injection wells
                                  located within the
                                  state.
Industry.......................  Private owners and               221310
                                  operators of Class I,
                                  II, III, IV, and V
                                  injection wells
                                  located within the
                                  state.
Municipalities.................  Municipal owners and             924110
                                  operators of Class I,
                                  II, III, IV, and V
                                  injection wells
                                  located within the
                                  state.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this
action. This table lists the types of entities that EPA is now aware
could potentially be regulated by this action. Other types of entities
not listed in the table could also be regulated. If you have questions
regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity,
consult the persons listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section.

III. Legal Authorities

    EPA approves the State of Tennessee's UIC Program primacy
application for Class I, II, III, IV, and V injection wells located
within the state, as required by rule under the SDWA, to prevent
underground injection activities that endanger underground sources of
drinking water. Accordingly, the Agency codifies the state's program in
the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at 40 CFR part 147, under the
authority of the SDWA, sections 1422 and 1450, 42 U.S.C. 300h-1 and
300j-9. The state applied to EPA under sections 1422 of the SDWA, 42
U.S.C. 300h-1, for primacy (primary enforcement responsibility) for all
UIC classes of injection wells, with the exception of Class VI
injection wells and all wells on Indian lands.
    The Agency's approval is based on a legal and technical review of
the state's primacy application as directed at 40 CFR part 145 and the
requirements for state permitting and compliance evaluation programs,
enforcement authority and information sharing at 40 CFR parts 124 and
144, to determine that the state's program is as stringent as all
applicable federal regulations. EPA oversees the state's administration
of the UIC program; part of the Agency's oversight responsibility
requires quarterly reports of non-compliance and annual UIC performance
reports pursuant to 40 CFR 144.8. The Memorandum of Agreement between
EPA and the State of Tennessee, signed by the Regional Administrator on
October 20, 2004, provides the Agency with the opportunity to review
and comment on all permits. The Agency continues to administer the UIC
program for Class VI injection wells in the state and all wells on
Indian lands (if any such lands exist in the state in the future).

IV. Tennessee's Application

A. Public Participation Activities Conducted by the State of Tennessee

    As part of the primacy application requirements, the state held
three public hearings on the state's intent to apply for primacy. The
hearings were held on July 9, 17, and 24, 2001, in the cities of
Jackson, Murfreesboro and Knoxville, respectively. The comments
received at the hearings were supportive of the state pursuing primacy
for the UIC program and expressed concerns related to allowing Class I
injection wells throughout the state. Because of these concerns, the
state has restricted the use of Class I injection wells to only certain
parts of the state. The state also placed a ban on the construction and
operation of Class I hazardous waste injection wells in the state.
Currently the State of Tennessee has no Class I injection wells.

B. Public Participation Activities Conducted by EPA

    On May 3, 2012, the Agency published a document of the state's
application in the Federal Register (77 FR 262331). This document
provided that a public hearing would be held if requested. There was
one request for a public hearing; therefore, the Agency held a public
hearing on June, 7, 2012, in Nashville. At the hearing, a commenter
requested and received clarification from the Agency related to the
approval of Class V injection wells. The commenter also raised concerns
regarding state permitting fees and the funding source for the state's
UIC program. The Agency determined that the fee and funding issues are
outside the scope of the federal program and are not relevant as to
whether the state's regulations are as stringent as the federal
regulations.

C. Incorporation by Reference

    This direct final rule amends 40 CFR part 147 and incorporates by
reference EPA-approved state statutes and regulations. The provisions
of the State of Tennessee's Code that contain standards, requirements
and procedures applicable to owners or operators of UIC well classes I,
II, III, IV, and V are incorporated by reference into 40 CFR part 147.
Any provisions incorporated by reference, as well as all permit
conditions or permit denials issued pursuant to such provisions, will
be enforceable by EPA pursuant to the SDWA, section 1423 and 40 CFR
147.1(e).
    In order to better serve the public, the Agency is reformatting the
codification of the EPA-approved state statutes and regulations for
Well Classes I, II, III, IV, and V. Instead of codifying the Tennessee
Statutes and Regulations as separate paragraphs, the Agency is now
codifying a binder that contains the EPA-approved Tennessee Statutes
and Regulations for Well Classes I, II, III, IV, and V. This binder
will be incorporated by reference into 40 CFR part 147 and available at
regulations.gov in the docket for this rule. The Agency will also
codify a table listing the EPA-approved Tennessee Statutes and
Regulations for Well Classes I, II, III, IV, and V in 40 CFR part 147.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is not a significant regulatory action and was
therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose any new information collection burden.
EPA determined that there is no need for an Information Collection
Request under the Paperwork Reduction Act because this direct final
rule does not impose any new federal reporting or recordkeeping
requirements. Reporting or recordkeeping requirements are based on the
State of Tennessee UIC Regulations, and the state is not subject to the
Paperwork Reduction Act. However, OMB has previously approved the
information collection requirements contained in the existing
regulations (40 CFR parts 144-148) under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and assigned OMB
control number 2040-0042. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations
in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. In
making this determination, the impact of concern is any significant
adverse economic impact on small entities. An agency may certify that a
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden, has no
net burden or otherwise has a positive economic effect on the small
entities subject to the rule. This action does not impose any new
requirements on any regulated entities. It simply codifies the State of
Tennessee's UIC Program regulations, which are at least as stringent as
the federal regulations. We have therefore concluded that this action
will have no net regulatory burden for all directly regulated small
entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain an unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1521-1538. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any
state, local or tribal governments or the private sector.

E. Executive Order 13132--Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

F. Executive Order 13175--Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175 as explained in section V.C. Thus, Executive
Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health & Safety Risks

    EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks
that EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect children,
per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in section 2-202 of
the Executive Order. This action is not subject to Executive Order
13045 because it approves a state action as explained in section V.C.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

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

    EPA believes the human health or environmental risk addressed by
this action will not have potential disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income or
indigenous populations because the rule does not affect or change the
level of protection provided to human health or the environment.

K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

    This action is subject to the CRA, and EPA will submit a rule
report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of
the United States. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 147

    Environmental protection, Incorporation by reference, Indian-lands,
Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
and Water supply.

    Dated: March 30, 2015.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40 of the Code of
Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 147--STATE, TRIBAL, AND EPA-ADMINISTERED UNDERGROUND INJECTION
CONTROL PROGRAMS

0
1. The authority citation for part 147 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 300h et seq.; and 42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq.

0
2. Add Sec.  147.2150 to read as follows:

Sec.  147.2150  State-administered program--Class I, II, III, IV, and V
wells.

    The UIC program for Class I, II, III, IV, and V wells in the State
of Tennessee, except for those on any Indian lands, is the program
administered by the Tennessee Department of Environment and
Conservation, approved by EPA pursuant to section 1422 of the SDWA.
Notice of this approval was published in the Federal Register on April
6, 2015; the effective date of this program is July 6, 2015. This
program consists of the following elements, as submitted to EPA in the
state's program application.
    (a) Incorporation by reference. The requirements set forth in the
Tennessee State statutes and regulations cited in the binder (Volumes 1
and 2) entitled ``EPA-Approved State of Tennessee Safe Drinking Water
Act section 1422 Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program Statutes
and Regulations for Well Classes I, II, III, IV, and V,'' dated
September 2013 and Table 1 to paragraph (a) of this section are hereby
incorporated by reference and made a part of the applicable UIC program
under the SDWA for the State of Tennessee. This incorporation by
reference was approved by the Director of the Federal Register in
accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies of the
Tennessee regulations may be obtained or inspected at Tennessee
Department of Environment and Conservation, 6th Floor, 401 Church
Street, Nashville, Tennessee 32743,<PHONE_NUMBER>, at the
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960,<PHONE_NUMBER> or at the National

Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on
availability of this material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to:
http://www.archives.gov/locations/.

Table 1 to Paragraph (a) EPA-Approved Tennessee SDWA Section 1422 Underground Injection Control Program Statutes
                             and Regulations for Well Classes I, II, III, IV, and V
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         State effective
         State citation              Title/subject             date                 EPA approval date \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tennessee Code Annotated, Title   Uniform              August 5, 2011.....  4/6/15 [Insert Federal Register
 4, Chapter 5.                     Administrative                            Citation].
                                   Procedures Act.
Tennessee Code Annotated, Title   Subsurface Sewage    August 5, 2011.....  4/6/15 [Insert Federal Register
 68, Chapter 221, Part 4.          Disposal Systems.                         Citation].
Tennessee Code Annotated, Title   Tennessee Safe       July 9, 2012.......  4/6/15 [Insert Federal Register
 68, Chapter 221, Part 7.          Drinking Water Act                        Citation].
                                   of 1983.
Tennessee Code Annotated, Title   Hazardous Waste      July 9, 2012.......  4/6/15 [Insert Federal Register
 68, Chapter 212, Section 101 et   Management Act of                         Citation].
 seq.                              1977.
Tennessee Code Annotated, Title   Hazardous Waste      July 9, 2012.......  4/6/15 [Insert Federal Register
 68, Chapter 212, Section 201 et   Management Act of                         Citation].
 seq.                              1983.
Tennessee Code Annotated, Title   Tennessee            May 10, 2012.......  4/6/15 [Insert Federal Register
 68, Chapter 203.                  Environmental                             Citation].
                                   Protection Fund.
Tennessee Code Annotated, Title   Tennessee Solid      June 25, 2009......  4/6/15 [Insert Federal Register
 68, Chapter 211, Part 1.          Waste Disposal Act.                       Citation].
Tennessee Code Annotated, Title   Tennessee Petroleum  June 29, 2009......  4/6/15 [Insert Federal Register
 68, Chapter 215, Part 1.          Underground                               Citation].
                                   Storage Tank Act.
Tennessee Code Annotated, Title   Water Quality        October 1, 2012....  4/6/15 [Insert Federal Register
 69, Chapter 3, Part 1.            Control Act.                              Citation].
Official Compilation Rules &      Underground          December 11, 2012..  4/6/15 [Insert Federal Register
 Regulations of the State of       Injection Control.                        Citation].
 Tennessee Chapter 0400-45-06.
Official Compilation Rules &      Public Water         December 11, 2012..  4/6/15 [Insert Federal Register
 Regulations of the State of       Systems.                                  Citation].
 Tennessee Chapter 0400-45-01.
Compilation Rules & Regulations   Regulations to       November 24, 2009..  4/6/15 [Insert Federal Register
 of the State of Tennessee         Govern Subsurface                         Citation].
 Chapter 1200-1-6.                 Sewage Disposal
                                   Systems.
Official Compilation Rules &      Hazardous Waste      September 20, 2012.  4/6/15 [Insert Federal Register
 Regulations of the State of       Management.                               Citation].
 Tennessee Chapter 0400-12-01-
 .02(1)(c).
Official Compilation Rules &      Standards For        May 22, 2012.......  4/6/15 [Insert Federal Register
 Regulations of the State of       Protection Against                        Citation].
 Tennessee Chapter 0400-20-05-     Radiation.
 .161.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In order to determine the EPA effective date for a specific provision listed in this table, consult the
  Federal Register document cited in this column for the particular provision.

    (b) Memorandum of Agreement (MOA). The MOA between EPA Region 4 and
the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation signed by EPA
Regional Administrator on October 20, 2004.
    (c) Statements of legal authority. ``Underground Injection Control
Program, Attorney General's Statement,'' signed by Attorney General of
Tennessee on July 26, 2005 and ``Updating the Attorney General's
Statement on UIC Program Authority,'' signed by General Counsel of the
Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation on November 10,
2011.
    (d) Program description. The Program Description submitted as part
of Tennessee's application, and any other materials submitted as part
of this application or as a supplement thereto.

0
3. In Sec.  147.2151, revise the section heading and the first sentence
in paragraph (a) to read as follows:

Sec.  147.2151  EPA-administered program Class VI and Indian lands.

    (a) Contents. The UIC program for Class VI wells and all wells on
Indian lands in the State of Tennessee is administered by EPA. ***
* * * * *

Sec. Sec.  147.2154 and 147.2155  [Removed]

0
4. Remove Sec. Sec.  147.2154 and 147.2155.

[FR Doc. 2015-07746 Filed 4-3-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 10 (Tuesday, January 17, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2304-2306]
[FR Doc No: 2012-631]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID: FEMA-2011-0042; OMB No. 1660-0083]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request, Application for Community Disaster Loan (CDL) Program

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency, as part of its
continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites
the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity
to comment on a proposed extension,

without change, of a currently approved information collection. In
accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice seeks
comments concerning the Community Disaster Loan (CDL) Program. This
collection allows the government to make loans to communities that have
suffered economic problems due to disasters.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before March 19, 2012.

ADDRESSES: To avoid duplicate submissions to the docket, please use
only one of the following means to submit comments:
    (1) Online. Submit comments at www.regulations.gov under Docket ID
FEMA-2011-0042. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
    (2) Mail. Submit written comments to Regulatory Affairs Division,
Office of Chief Counsel, DHS/FEMA, 500 C Street SW., Room 835,
Washington, DC 20472-3100.
    (3) Facsimile. Submit comments to<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) Email. Submit comments to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Include Docket
ID FEMA-2011-0042 in the subject line.
    All submissions received must include the agency name and Docket
ID. Regardless of the method used for submitting comments or material,
all submissions will be posted, without change, to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov, and will include any
personal information you provide. Therefore, submitting this
information makes it public. You may wish to read the Privacy Act
notice that is available via the link in the footer of
www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Victor Kurz, Program Manager, Disaster
Assistance Directorate, Public Assistance Division,<PHONE_NUMBER> for
additional information. You may contact the Records Management Division
for copies of the proposed collection of information at facsimile
number<PHONE_NUMBER> or email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Community Disaster Loan (CDL) Program is
authorized by Section 417 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and
Emergency Assistance Act, Public Law 93-288, as amended, 42 U.S.C.
5184, and implementing regulations at 44 CFR subpart K. The Assistant
Administrator may make a CDL to any local government which has suffered
a substantial loss of tax or other revenues as a result of a major
disaster or emergency and which demonstrates a need for Federal
financial assistance in order to perform its governmental functions.

Collection of Information

    Title: Application for Community Disaster Loan (CDL) Program.
    Type of Information Collection: Extension, without change, of a
currently approved information collection.
    OMB Number: 1660-0083.
    Form Titles and Numbers: FEMA Form 090-0-1, Certification of
Eligibility for Community Disaster Loans; FEMA Form 116-0-1, Promissory
Note; FEMA Form 085-0-1, Local Government Resolution--Collateral
Security; FEMA Form 090-0-2, Application for Community Disaster Loan.
    Abstract: The loan package for the CDL Program provides States,
Local and Tribal governments that have suffered substantial loss of tax
or other revenues as a result of a major disaster or emergency, the
opportunity to obtain financial assistance in order to perform their
governmental functions. The loan must be justified on the basis of need
and actual expenses.
    Affected Public: State, local or Tribal Government.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 975 hours.

                                                                           Estimated Annualized Burden Hours and Costs
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of                      Avg. burden    Total annual                    Total annual
              Type of respondent                      Form name/form number          Number of     responses per   Total number    per response     burden  (in     Avg. hourly     respondent
                                                                                respondents     respondent     of responses     (in hours)        hours)         wage rate         cost
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State, Local or Tribal Government.............  Certification of Eligibility for              50               1              50         \1\ 2.5             125          $49.32          $6,165
                                                 Community Disaster Loans/FEMA
                                                 Form 090-0-1.
 State, Local or Tribal Government............  Promissory Note/FEMA Form 116-0-              50               1              50               4             200           49.32           9,864
                                                 1.
 State, Local or Tribal Government............  Local Government Resolution--                 50               1              50              10             500           49.32          24,660
                                                 Collateral Security/FEMA Form
                                                 085-0-1.
 State, Local or Tribal Government............  Application for Community                     50               1              50               1              50           49.32           2,466
                                                 Disaster Loan/FEMA Form 090-0-2.
 State, Local or Tribal Government............  Annual Financial Report.........              50               1              50               1              50           38.04           1,902
State, Local or Tribal Government.............  Letter of Application...........              50               1              50               1              50           49.32           2,337
                                                                                ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.....................................  ................................              50  ..............              50  ..............             975  ..............          47,523
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 150 minutes.
Note: The ``Avg. Hourly Wage Rate'' for each respondent includes a 1.4 multiplier to reflect a fully-loaded wage rate.

    Estimated Cost: The estimated annual cost to respondents for the
hour burden is $47,523. There are no annual costs to respondents'
operations and maintenance costs for technical services. There are no
annual start-up or capital costs. The cost to the Federal Government is
$1,015,220.

Comments

    Comments may be submitted as indicated in the ADDRESSES caption
above. Comments are solicited to (a) Evaluate whether the proposed data
collection is necessary for the proper performance of the agency,
including whether the information shall have practicality; (b) evaluate
the accuracy of

the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of
information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions
used; (c) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
to be collected; and (d) minimize the burden of the collection of
information on those who are to respond, including through the use of
appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological
collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g.,
permitting electronic submission of responses.

John G. Jenkins, Jr.,
Acting Director, Records Management Division, Mission Support Bureau,
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2012-631 Filed 1-13-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P