[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 186 (Wednesday, September 25, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 58868-58872]
[FR Doc No: 2013-23017]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0146; Directorate Identifier 2012-SW-060-AD;
Amendment 39-17559; AD 2013-16-21]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Agusta S.p.A. (Type Certificate
Currently Held by Agusta Westland S.p.A) (Agusta) Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are superseding an airworthiness directive (AD) for Agusta
Model A109E helicopters that required reducing the tail rotor (T/R)
blade life limit, modifying a T/R hub and grip assembly, re-identifying
two T/R assemblies, clarifying the never-exceed speed (Vne) limitation,
and reducing the inspection interval. Since we issued that AD, the
manufacturer has redesigned a T/R grip bushing (bushing) that reduces
the loads, which caused the T/R cracking, on the T/R blades. This
action requires installing the new bushing and re-identifying the T/R
hub-and-grip and hub-and-blade assemblies and requires a recurring
inspection of each bushing. These actions are intended to prevent
fatigue failure of a T/R blade and subsequent loss of control of the
helicopter.

DATES: This AD is effective October 30, 2013.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain document listed in this AD as of October 30,
2013.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
Agusta

Westland, Customer Support & Services, Via Per Tornavento 15, 21019
Somma Lombardo (VA) Italy, ATTN: Giovanni Cecchelli; telephone 39-0331-
711133; fax 39-0331-711180; or at http://www.agustawestland.com/technical-bullettins. You may review the referenced service information
at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601
Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, Texas 76137.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov or in person at the Docket Operations Office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the foreign authority's AD,
any incorporated-by-reference service information, the economic
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Operations Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket Operations Office, M-30, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sharon Miles, Aviation Safety
Engineer, Regulations and Policy Group, Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA,
2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76137; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    On February 25, 2013, at 78 FR 12651, the Federal Register
published our notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), which proposed to
amend 14 CFR part 39 to supersede AD 2002-25-51, Amendment 39-13060 (68
FR 9504, February 28, 2003), which required for Agusta Model A109E
helicopters reducing the tail rotor (T/R) blade life limit, modifying a
T/R hub and grip assembly, re-identifying two T/R assemblies,
clarifying the never-exceed speed (Vne) limitation, and reducing the
inspection interval.
    The NPRM was prompted by AD No. 2007-0010, dated January 31, 2007,
issued by the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the
Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union. EASA
issued EASA AD No. 2007-0010 to correct an unsafe condition for the
Agusta Model A109E. EASA advises that Agusta has designed a new bushing
that when installed on the T/R grip assembly reduces the loads acting
upon the T/R blades. EASA further advises that following installation
of the re-designed bushing, the inspection interval of the T/R blade
bushing may be extended from 150 flight hours to 200 flight hours.
Accordingly, the NPRM proposed to require:
     Before each start of the helicopter engines, visually
checking both sides of each T/R blade for a crack. An owner/operator
(pilot) may perform this check and must enter compliance into the
aircraft records in accordance with 14 CFR 43.9 (a)(1)-(4) and 14 CFR
91.417(a)(2)(v). A pilot may perform this check because it involves
only a visual check for a crack and can be performed equally well by a
pilot or a mechanic. This procedure is an exception to our standard
maintenance regulations.
     For helicopters with T/R hub and blade assembly, part
number (P/N) 109-8131-02-151, before further flight, modifying each T/R
hub and blade assembly by installing a new bushing in each grip
assembly and two zero-hours time-in-service (TIS) T/R blades; and re-
identifying the hub and grip assembly and the T/R hub and blade
assembly with different P/Ns.
     For helicopters with T/R hub and blade assembly, P/N 109-
8131-02-157, within 25 hours TIS and thereafter at intervals not to
exceed 25 hours TIS, and before further flight any time there is an
increase in vibration levels, using a 5x or higher power magnifying
glass, visually inspecting each T/R blade for a crack.
     On or before accumulating 200 hours TIS on the T/R hub and
grip assembly, and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 200 hours TIS,
inspecting the linings and measuring the internal diameter of the
bushings. If the internal diameter of the bushing exceeds 41.35
millimeters, replacing the bushing.
     If there is a crack, before further flight, replacing the
T/R blade.
     Revising the Airworthiness Limitations section of the
maintenance manual to reflect that a T/R blade, P/N 109-8132-01-111,
which has not been operated as part of T/R hub and blade assembly, P/N
109-8131-02-151, has a retirement life of 1,000 hours TIS.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD, but we did not receive any comments on the NPRM (78 FR 12651,
February 25, 2013).

FAA's Determination

    These helicopters have been approved by the aviation authority of
Italy and are approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to
our bilateral agreement with Italy, EASA, its technical representative,
has notified us of the unsafe condition described in the EASA AD. We
are issuing this AD because we evaluated all information provided by
EASA and determined the unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist
or develop on other helicopters of the same type design and that air
safety and the public interest require adopting the AD requirements as
proposed.

Related Service Information

    We reviewed Alert Bollettino Tecnico No. 109EP-30, Revision C,
dated September 29, 2006, which describes procedures for checking/
inspecting for cracks on both the upper and lower surfaces of T/R
blades, P/N 109-8132-01-111; replacing each bushing, P/N 109-0132-55
and spacer P/N 109-0132-13, with bushing, P/N 109-8131-30-109, and
instituting a recurring inspection of each bushing; and cancelling the
VNE limitations when the newly-designed bushing is installed
on each T/R grip assembly, P/N 109-8131-29-101, a ``new'' pair of T/R
blades, P/N 109-8132-01-111, is installed, and the T/R hub-and-grip and
hub-and-blade assemblies are re-identified.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 75 helicopters of U.S.
Registry. Based on an average labor rate of $85 per hour, we estimate
that operators will incur the following costs in order to comply with
this AD:
     Visually inspecting the T/R blades requires about 0.5 work
hours for a cost per helicopter of $43 and a total cost to U.S.
operators of $3,225 per inspection cycle.
     Replacing a cracked T/R blade requires about 2 work hours,
and required parts cost about $25,320, for a total cost per helicopter
of $25,490.
     Modifying the hub assembly with new T/R blades and
bushings requires about 16 work hours, and required parts would cost
about $58,690, for a total cost per helicopter of $60,050.
     Inspecting the T/R bushings requires about 7 work hours,
for a cost per helicopter of $595 and a total cost to U.S. operators of
$44,625 per inspection cycle.
     Revising the Airworthiness Limitations section of the
maintenance manual requires about .25 work hour, for a cost per
helicopter of $22 and a total cost to U.S. operators of $1,650.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of

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

Regulatory Findings

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866;
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska to the extent
that it justifies making a regulatory distinction; and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared an economic evaluation of the estimated costs to comply
with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2002-25-51, Amendment 39-13060 (68 FR 9504, February 28, 2003), and
adding the following new AD:

2013-16-21 AGUSTA S.p.A. (Agusta): Amendment 39-17559; Docket No.
FAA-2013-0146; Directorate Identifier 2012-SW-060-AD.

(a) Applicability

    This AD applies to Agusta Model 109E helicopters with tail rotor
(T/R) hub and blade assembly, part number (P/N) 109-8131-02-151 and
P/N 109-8131-02-157, certificated in any category.

(b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as a fatigue crack in a T/R
blade. This condition could result in failure of the T/R blade and
subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

(c) Affected ADs

    This AD supersedes AD 2002-25-51, Docket No. 2002-SW-55-AD,
Amendment 39-13060 (68 FR 9504, February 28, 2003).

(d) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective October 30, 2013.

(e) Compliance

    You are responsible for performing each action required by this
AD within the specified compliance time unless it has already been
accomplished prior to that time.

(f) Required Actions

    (1) Before each start of the helicopter engines, visually check
both sides of each T/R blade for a crack in the inspection area
depicted in Figure 1 to paragraph (f)(1) of this AD. This action may
be performed by the owner/operator (pilot) holding at least a
private pilot certificate, and must be entered into the aircraft
records showing compliance with this AD in accordance with 14 CFR
43.9 (a)(1)-(4) and 14 CFR 91.417(a)(2)(v). The record must be
maintained as required by 14 CFR 91.417, 121.380, or 135.439.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR25SE13.000

    (2) For helicopters with T/R hub and blade assembly, P/N 109-
8131-02-151 (consisting of two T/R blades, P/N 109-8132-01-111, and
one T/R hub and grip assembly, P/N 109-8131-02-127), before further
flight, modify each T/R hub and blade assembly by installing a new
bushing, P/N 109-8131-30-109, in each grip assembly and two zero-
hour time-in-service (TIS) T/R blades, P/N 109-8132-01-111; re-
identifying the hub and grip assembly as P/N 109-8131-02-159; and
re-identifying the T/R hub and blade assembly as P/N 109-8131-02-157
in accordance with the Compliance Instructions, Part V, paragraphs
2. through 13., of Agusta Bollettino Tecnico No. 109EP-30, Revision
C, dated September 29, 2006 (BT). A T/R blade, P/N 109-8132-01-111,
which has been operated as part of T/R hub and blade assembly, P/N
109-8131-02-151, must be retired regardless of TIS and may not be
used as part of the T/R hub and blade assembly, P/N 109-8131-02-157.
Returning the removed T/R blades, grips, or bushings to Agusta is
not required.
    (3) For helicopters with T/R hub and blade assembly, P/N 109-
8131-02-157 (consisting of two T/R blades, P/N 109-8132-01-111, and
one T/R hub and grip assembly, P/N 109-8131-02-159), within 25 hours
TIS, and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 25 hours TIS, and
before further flight any time there is an increase in vibration
levels, using a 5x or higher power magnifying glass, visually
inspect each T/R blade for a crack in accordance with the Compliance
Instructions, Part III, paragraphs 1. through 5. of the BT.
Reporting to Agusta is not required.
    (4) On or before accumulating 200 hours TIS on the T/R hub and
grip assembly, P/N 109-8131-02-159, and thereafter at intervals not
to exceed 200 hours TIS, inspect the linings and measure the
internal diameter of the bushings, P/N 109-8131-30-109, by referring
to Figure 2 of the BT. If the internal diameter of the bushing
exceeds 41.35 millimeters, replace the bushing.
    (5) If there is a crack in a T/R blade, before further flight,
replace the cracked T/R blade.
    (6) Revise the Airworthiness Limitations section of the
maintenance manual to reflect that a T/R blade, P/N 109-8132-01-111,
which has not been operated as part of T/R hub and blade assembly,
P/N 109-8131-02-151, has retirement life of 1,000 hours TIS.

(g) Special Flight Permits

    Special flight permits will not be issued.

(h) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Safety Management Group, FAA, may approve AMOCs
for this AD. Send your proposal to: Sharon Miles, Aviation Safety
Engineer, Regulations and Policy Group, Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA,
2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas, 76137; telephone (817) 222-
5110; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For operations conducted under a 14 CFR part 119 operating
certificate or under 14 CFR part 91, subpart K, we suggest that you
notify your principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector,
the manager of the local flight standards district office or
certificate holding district office, before operating any aircraft
complying with this AD through an AMOC.

(i) Additional Information

    The subject of this AD is addressed in European Aviation Safety
Agency (EASA) AD No. 2007-0010, dated January 31, 2007. You may view
a copy of the EASA AD on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov
in Docket No. FAA-2013-0146.

(j) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 6410, Tail Rotor
Blades.

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Agusta Bollettino Tecnico No. 109EP-30, Revision C, dated
September 29, 2006, excluding Figure 1.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (3) For Agusta service information identified in this AD,
contact Agusta Westland, Customer Support & Services, Via Per
Tornavento 15, 21019 Somma Lombardo (VA) Italy, ATTN: Giovanni
Cecchelli; telephone 39-0331-711133; fax 39-0331-711180; or at
http://www.agustawestland.com/technical-bullettins.
    (4) You may view this service information at FAA, Office of the
Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663,
Fort Worth, Texas 76137. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may also view this service information that is
incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://

www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on August 2, 2013.
Lance T. Gant,
Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-23017 Filed 9-24-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


MEMORANDUM

To:		Docket EPA - HQ - OAR - 2016 - 0490

From: 	Karen Marsh, U.S. EPA, OAQPS, Sector Policies and Programs Division

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject:	Discussion of Comments Submitted by Gulf Coast Waste Disposal Authority
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 	April 18, 2017
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On April 18, 2017, Karen Marsh had a telephone discussion with Shaun Austin of Gulf Coast Waste Disposal Authority (GCWDA) to discuss GCWDA's comments on the proposed revisions to the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW). GCWDA owns and operates 3 POTW that are subject to the 1999 NESHAP. These include the Bayport Facility (Group 1), 40-Acre Facility (Group 2), and Washburn Tunnel (Group 2). Below is a summary of the topics discussed during each telephone conversation.

GCWDA submitted information on all 3 POTW during the October 2015 information collection effort that indicated all 3 POTW were major sources and subject to the 1999 NESHAP. In reviewing these submissions and preparing the review of the rule, EPA inadvertently did not include 40-Acre or Washburn Tunnel in the analysis. In the public comment submission from GCWDA (DCN EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0490-0052), GCWDA alerted EPA to this error.

EPA followed up via telephone to discuss HAP emissions from 40-Acre and Washburn Tunnel. Mr. Austin stated that both POTW are subject as existing Group 2 POTW because emission modeling (using Water9 and ToxChem+) indicated the potential HAP emissions would exceed the major source threshold of 10 tons per year (tpy) for any single HAP or 25 tpy for any combination of HAP. Mr. Austin further indicated that while these are the potential emissions, neither POTW has exceeded these thresholds in actual operating conditions. When asked which HAP are the primary pollutants, Mr. Austin stated that methanol is the largest emission for both facilities. Additionally, Mr. Austin stated that GCWDA had submitted emissions estimates to the state of Texas for the 2016 calendar year in March 2017 and indicated this information would be publicly available to EPA.


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 179 (Friday, September 14, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46731-46732]
[FR Doc No: 2018-19996]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP18-46-001]

Notice of Applications; Adelphia Gateway, LLC

    Take notice that on August 31, 2018, Adelphia Gateway, LLC
(Adelphia), 1415 Wyckoff Road Wall, New Jersey 07719, filed an
amendment to its January 12, 2018 application under section 7(c) of the
Natural Gas Act (NGA) and Part 157 of the Commission's rules and
regulations requesting certificate authority to reflect an increase in
its design capacity on Zone North A from 175,000 dekatherms per day
(Dth/d) to 250,000 Dth/d. In light of the increased Zone North A design
capacity, Adelphia proposes to modify its initial transportation rates
in the pro forma FERC Gas Tariff. Adelphia also proposes to amend the
Usage-2 Rate under Rate Schedule FTS to reflect the 100 percent load
factor rates, all as more fully described in the application which is
on file with the Commission and open to public inspection. The filing
may also be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.gov using the
``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. For
assistance, contact FERC at [email protected] or call toll-
free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any questions regarding this application should be directed to
William P. Scharfenberg, Assistant General Counsel, Adelphia Gateway,
LLC, 1415 Wyckoff Road, Wall, NJ 07719, or call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
email: [email protected].
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the comment date stated below file with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426, a
motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or
385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person
obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by
the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all
documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must
submit 5 copies of filings made in the proceeding with the Commission
and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other party. Only
parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders
in the proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project.
The Commission will

consider these comments in determining the appropriate action to be
taken, but the filing of a comment alone will not serve to make the
filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's rules require that
persons filing comments in opposition to the project provide copies of
their protests only to the party or parties directly involved in the
protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commentors will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commentors will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commentors will
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court
review of the Commission's final order.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests, and interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link
at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should
submit an original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the
Federal Energy regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on September 28, 2018.

    Dated: September 7, 2018.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-19996 Filed 9-13-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 103 (Friday, May 27, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 32084-32086]
[FR Doc No: 2022-11448]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2022-0358]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Candice Jones Wedding Fireworks; Oswego River;
Oswego, NY

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for
navigable waters within a 150-foot radius of land launched fireworks
over Oswego River in Oswego, NY. The safety zone is needed to protect
personnel, vessels, and the marine environment from potential hazards
created by a fireworks display. Entry of vessels or persons into this
zone is prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the
Port Buffalo or a designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 8:15 p.m. through 9:45 p.m. on May
28, 2022.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2022-0358 in the search box and click ``Search.'' Next, in the Document
Type column, select ``Supporting & Related Material.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email MST2 Anthony Urbana, Sector Buffalo, U.S. Coast Guard;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

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

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice
and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C.

553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not
publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking with respect to this rule
because the event sponsor did not submit notice of the fireworks
display to the Coast Guard with sufficient time remaining before the
event to publish an NPRM. Delaying the effective date of this rule to
wait for a comment period to run would be impracticable by preventing
the Coast Guard from protecting spectators and vessels from the hazards
associated with this fireworks display.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. For the same reasons discussed in
the preceding paragraph, waiting for a 30-day notice period to run
would be impracticable because we must establish this safety zone by
May 28, 2022.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C.
70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231). The Captain of the Port (COTP)
Buffalo has determined that fireworks over the water presents
significant risks to public safety and property within a 150-foot
radius of the launch point. This rule is needed to protect personnel,
vessels, and the marine environment in the navigable waters within the
safety zone while the fireworks display is taking place.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a safety zone from 8:15 p.m. through 9:45
p.m. on May 28, 2022. The safety zone will cover all navigable waters
within a 150-foot radius of land launched fireworks over Oswego River
in Oswego, NY. The duration of the zone is intended to protect
spectators, vessels, and the marine environment in these navigable
waters during the fireworks display. No vessel or person will be
permitted to enter the safety zone without obtaining permission from
the COTP Buffalo or a designated representative.

V. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. This rule has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, this
rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB).
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
location, duration, and time-of-day of the safety zone. The safety zone
will encompass a 150-foot radius from the land-launched fireworks in
the Oswego River in Oswego, NY, with the event lasting approxiamately
1.5 hours during the evening when vessel traffic is normally low.
Moreover, the Coast Guard would issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners
via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the zone, and the rule would allow
vessels to seek permission to enter the zone.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any
vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

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

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

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

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and
Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast

Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one
of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have
a significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves a
safety zone lasting approximately 1.5 hours that will prohibit entry
within a 150-foot radius in Oswego River in Oswego, NY. for a fireworks
display. It is categorically excluded from further review under
paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-
01-001-01, Rev. 1. A Record of Environmental Consideration supporting
this determination is available in the docket. For instructions on
locating the docket, see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble.

G. Protest Activities

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

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority: Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05-1,
6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 00170.1, Revision No. 01.2.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T09-0358 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T09-0358  Safety Zone; Candice Jones Wedding Fireworks;
Oswego River; Oswego, NY.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All waters of
the Oswego River, from surface to bottom, encompassed by a 150-foot
radius around 43[deg]27'36.80'' N, 076[deg]30'43.52'' W.
    (b) Definitions. As used in this section, designated representative
means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a Coast Guard coxswain,
petty officer, or other officer operating a Coast Guard vessel and a
Federal, State, and local officer designated by or assisting the
Captain of the Port Buffalo (COTP) in the enforcement of the safety
zone.
    (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
Sec.  165.23, entry into, transiting, or anchoring within this safety
zone is prohibited unless authorized by the COTP Buffalo or a
designated representative.
    (2) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety
zone must contact the COTP Buffalo or his designated representative to
obtain permission to do so. The COTP Buffalo or his designated
representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16. Vessel operators
given permission to enter or operate in the safety zone must comply
with all directions given to them by the COTP Buffalo, or his
designated representative.
    (d) Enforcement period. The regulated area described in paragraph
(a) is effective from 8:15 p.m. through 9:45 p.m. on May 28, 2022.

    Dated: May 16, 2022.
M.I. Kuperman,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Buffalo.
[FR Doc. 2022-11448 Filed 5-26-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 224 (Wednesday, November 22, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55622-55623]
[FR Doc No: 2017-25315]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID: FEMA-2017-0030; OMB No. 1660-0142]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Survivor Sheltering Assessment

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

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 Survivor Sheltering Assessment extension, with change,
of a currently approved information collection. In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice seeks comments concerning
FEMA collecting information regarding the housing needs of individuals
and families in shelters so that services and assistance can be
provided to transition them out of shelters and into temporary housing
solutions, as quickly as possible.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before January 22, 2018.

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-2017-0030. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

    (2) Mail. Submit written comments to Docket Manager, Office of
Chief Counsel, DHS/FEMA, 500 C Street SW., 8NE, Washington, DC 20472-
3100.
    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: Leah Davis, Program Manager, Disaster
Management Support Environment, Recovery Technology Programs Division,
540-686-3227. You may contact the Records Management Division for
copies of the proposed collection of information at email address:
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and
Emergency Assistance Act, Public Law 93-288, as amended, is the legal
basis for FEMA to provide financial assistance and services to
individuals who apply for disaster assistance benefits in the event of
a federally-declared disaster. 44 CFR 206.110 implements the policy and
procedures set forth in section 408 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster
Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5174, as amended by the
Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000. This program provides financial
assistance and, if necessary, direct assistance to eligible individuals
and households who, as a direct result of a major disaster or
emergency, have uninsured or under-insured necessary expenses and
serious needs and are unable to meet such expenses or needs through
other means. Individuals and households that apply for this assistance
must provide information detailing their losses and need.
    FEMA requires the ability to collect information regarding the
housing needs of survivors in shelters to provide services and
assistance to transition them out of shelters and into temporary
housing solutions as quickly as possible. Survivor-specific data
collected in the shelters would be compared to survivor registration
data to determine:
     Has the survivor in the shelter registered for FEMA
assistance?
     If registered, what is the status of the survivor's
registration? Do they have resources such as Transitional Sheltering
Assistance (TSA) eligibility or financial rental assistance, available
to them?
     If registered and not eligible for FEMA assistance, is
there casework that could be performed to find eligibility?
     If not registered, information would be provided to the
Joint Field Office (JFO) to have a registration strike team travel to
the shelter and register the survivor.
    Aggregated reports resulting from the individualized data
collection will support JFO planning activities for shelter
depopulation to ensure that survivors are transitioned as quickly as
possible to housing solutions that best meet their need.

Collection of Information

    Title: Survivor Sheltering Assessment.
    Type of Information Collection: Currently approved information
collection with change.
    OMB Number: OMB No. 1660-0142.
    FEMA Form(s): FEMA Form 09-0-42, Survivor Sheltering Assessment.
    Abstract: When a Presidential federally declared disaster or
emergency occurs, impacted survivors often find themselves temporarily
housed in shelters until they are able to return to their homes or find
other housing solutions while they recovery. A FEMA employee will
interview individual survivors located in shelters regarding the
registration status and housing situation using an electronic copy of
FEMA Form 009-0-42 Survivor Sheltering Assessment to record the
information in the Disaster Management Support Environment Cloud
Environment (DMSE CE) database. The purpose of this survey is to help
FEMA understand how best it can support survivors as they transition
out of temporary shelters. No information given will be used to
determine eligibility for assistance. Eligibility for assistance will
only be determined through the separate registration process.
    Affected Public: Individuals and Households.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 31,200.
    Estimated Number of Responses: 31,200.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 5,201.
    Estimated Total Annual Respondent Cost: $181,203.
    Estimated Respondents' Operation and Maintenance Costs: None.
    Estimated Respondents' Capital and Start-Up Costs: None.
    Estimated Total Annual Cost to the Federal Government: $273,356.

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 practical utility; (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.

    Dated: November 15, 2017.
Tammi Hines,
Records Management Program Chief, Mission Support, Federal Emergency
Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2017-25315 Filed 11-21-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 10 (Tuesday, January 17, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 4794-4795]
[FR Doc No: 2017-00464]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2017-0007]
RIN 1625-AA87

Security Zones; Annual Events in the Captain of the Port Detroit
Zone--North American International Auto Show, Detroit River, Detroit MI

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of enforcement of regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce a security zone associated with
the North American International Auto Show, Detroit River, Detroit, MI.
This security zone is intended to restrict vessels from a portion of
the Detroit River in order to ensure the safety and security of
participants, visitors, and public officials at the North American
International Auto Show (NAIAS), which is being held at Cobo Hall in
downtown Detroit, MI. Vessels in close proximity to the security zone
will be subject to increased monitoring and boarding during the
enforcement of the security zone. No person or vessel may enter the
security zone while it is being enforced without permission of the
Captain of the Port Detroit.

DATES: The security zone regulation described in 33 CFR 165.915(a)(3)
will be enforced from 8 a.m. on January 9, 2017 through 11:59 p.m. on
January 22, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
document, call or email Tracy Girard, Prevention, U.S. Coast Guard
Sector Detroit, 110 Mount Elliot Ave., Detroit, MI 48207; telephone
(313) 568-9564; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard will enforce the North
American International Auto Show, Detroit River, Detroit, MI security
zone listed in 33 CFR 165.915(a)(3). This security zone includes all
waters of the Detroit River encompassed by a line beginning at a point
of origin on land adjacent to the west end of Joe Lewis Arena at
42[deg]19.44' N., 083[deg]03.11' W.; then extending offshore
approximately 150 yards to 42[deg]19.39' N., 083[deg]03.07' W.; then
proceeding upriver approximately 2000 yards to a point at 42[deg]19.72'
N., 083[deg]01.88' W.; then proceeding onshore to a point on land
adjacent the Tercentennial State Park at 42[deg]19.79' N.,
083[deg]01.90' W.; then proceeding downriver along the shoreline to
connect back to the point of origin. All coordinates are North American
Datum 1983.
    All persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of the
Captain of the Port Detroit or his designated on-scene representative,
who may be contacted via VHF Channel 16.
    Under the provisions of 33 CFR 165.33, no person or vessel may
enter or remain in this security zone without the permission of the
Captain of the Port Detroit. Each person and vessel in this security
zone shall obey any direction or order of the Captain of the Port
Detroit. The Captain of the Port Detroit may take possession and
control of any vessel in this security zone. The Captain of the Port
Detroit may remove any person, vessel, article, or thing from this
security zone. No person may board, or take or place any article or
thing on board any vessel in this security zone without the permission
of the Captain of Port Detroit. No person may take or place any article
or thing upon any waterfront facility in this security zone without the
permission of the Captain of the Port Detroit.
    Vessels that wish to transit through this security zone shall
request permission from the Captain of the Port Detroit or his
designated representative. Requests must be made in advance and
approved by the Captain of Port before transits will be authorized.
Approvals may be granted on a case by case basis. The Captain of the
Port may be contacted via U.S. Coast Guard Sector Detroit on channel
16, VHF-FM. The Coast Guard will give notice to the public via Local
Notice to Mariners and VHF radio broadcasts that the regulation is in
effect.
    This document is issued under authority of 33 CFR 165.915 and 5
U.S.C. 552 (a). If the Captain of the Port determines that this
security zone need not be enforced for the full duration stated in this
document; he may suspend such enforcement and notify the public of the
suspension via a Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

    Dated: January 6, 2017.
Scott B. Lemasters,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Detroit.
[FR Doc. 2017-00464 Filed 1-12-17; 4:15 pm]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 24 (Wednesday, February 5, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6655-6659]
[FR Doc No: 2020-02185]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-88092; File No. SR-NSCC-2020-001]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Securities Clearing
Corporation; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed
Rule Change To Enhance National Securities Clearing Corporation's
Automated Customer Account Transfer Service (ACATS) Transfer Processes
and Make Certain Clarifications in Rule 50

January 30, 2020.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on January 24, 2020, National Securities Clearing Corporation
(``NSCC'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule

change as described in Items I, II and III below, which Items have been
prepared by the clearing agency. NSCC filed the proposed rule change
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(4)
thereunder.\4\ The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

I. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the
Proposed Rule Change

    The proposed rule change consists of amendments to NSCC's Rules &
Procedures (``Rules'') in order to (i) make proposed enhancements to
NSCC's Automated Customer Account Transfer Service (``ACATS'') transfer
processes relating to acceleration, Reclaims, Residual Credits and
Partial Accounts and (ii) make certain clarifications to the Rules, as
described in greater detail below.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Capitalized terms not defined herein are defined in the
Rules, available at http://dtcc.com/~/media/Files/Downloads/legal/
rules/nscc_rules.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

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

(A) Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

(1) Purpose
    The proposed rule change consists of modifications to NSCC's Rules
in order to (i) make proposed enhancements to ACATS transfer processes
relating to acceleration, Reclaims, Residual Credits and Partial
Accounts and (ii) make certain clarifications to the Rules, as
described in greater detail below.
(a) Background--ACATS
    ACATS is a non-guaranteed service that enables Members to effect
automated transfers of customer accounts among themselves.\6\ Pursuant
to Rule 50, an NSCC Member to whom a customer's full account will be
transferred (the ``Receiving Member'') will initiate the transfer by
submitting a transfer initiation request to NSCC, which contains the
customer detail information that the NSCC Member who currently has the
account (the ``Delivering Member'') requires to transfer the account.
Delivering Members that have not rejected the account transfer request
or requested corrections to the request within the allotted time must
submit to NSCC certain detailed customer account asset data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ ACATS complements Financial Industry Regulatory Authority
(``FINRA'') Rule 11870 (``FINRA Rule 11870'') regarding customer
account transfers, which requires FINRA members to use automated
clearing agency customer account transfer services and to effect
customer account transfers within specified time frames. See FINRA
Rule 11870, available at https://www.finra.org/rules-guidance/rulebooks/finra-rules/11870.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Generally, under current practice, a full account transfer through
ACATS completes in five business days or, if ``accelerated'', four
business days, as follows:

 Day 1--Receiving Member sends request for transfer of a
customer account \7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Section 2 of Rule 50, supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Day 2--Delivering Member submits customer account asset data
list to NSCC \8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Section 5 of Rule 50, supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Day 3--Receiving Member has one business day to review the
customer account asset data list \9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Section 8 of Rule 50, supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Day 4--NSCC prepares to settle \10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Section 9 of Rule 50, supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Day 5--NSCC settles the transfer through ACATS and generates
reports\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Sections 9(ii) and 10 of Rule 50, supra note 5.

    Except as noted with respect to the Receiving Member's review day
on Day 3 above, which specifies one business day to review, the five-
day timing set forth above reflects NSCC's and the Members' current
practice and is not specifically set forth in the Rules. The timing and
procedures with respect to customer account transfers is intended to be
consistent with the timing set forth in FINRA Rule 11870. While the
five-day timing is illustrative of typical timing, variations may occur
if the Members that are party to the transfer agree. For instance, the
Delivering Member may deliver the asset list on Day 1 rather than Day
2, or, as discussed below, the Receiving Member may accept the assets
on Day 2 rather than Day 3.
    Under current practice, a Receiving Member may accept all or a
portion of the assets prior to the end of the review period and forego
its right to review the asset list for the remaining review period,
which is referred to as ``accelerating the transfer''. For instance, in
the above five-day example, if a Receiving Member accepts all or a
portion of the assets in Day 2, when it receives the asset data list,
it is choosing not to review the assets on Day 3 and removing a day
from the overall timing of a customer account transfer process. This
acceleration process is not explicitly stated in the Rules, except for
a reference to an ``acceleration instruction'' in Section 8 of Rule 50
which is referring to an instruction by the Receiving Member that the
Receiving Member accepts all or a portion of the assets and wishes to
accelerate the transfer.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Section 8 of Rule 50, supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    During the Receiving Member's review period, the Delivering Member
can add, delete or change an item on the asset list which, in each
case, adds another business day to the transfer cycle by giving the
Receiving Member one additional business day to review.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    During the transfer period, an investor's assets will remain
invested in the market but trading may be restricted.\14\ The inability
to trade may expose the investor to additional market risk. Currently
there is an industry initiative underway to shorten the ACATS
settlement cycle and create a more streamlined ACATS process.\15\ In
conjunction with the industry initiative, NSCC is proposing to modify
the Rules to formalize the acceleration process by explicitly stating
the right of the Receiving Member to accelerate a transfer, and to
restrict the ability of Members to adjust accounts that are being
transferred once an ACATS transfer in accelerated status in order to
reduce delays in transfers in accelerated status. In addition, NSCC is
proposing to modify the Rules relating to transfers upon Reclaims,\16\
Residual Credits \17\

and Partial Accounts \18\ to provide for a more efficient process for
ACATS account transfers. NSCC is also proposing to modify the Rules to
make some clarifications to improve readability of the Rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ During the period when an account transfer is pending, some
firms will freeze trading on the client account until the account
transfer is complete. Firms regulated by FINRA are required to
freeze the account, by cancelling all open orders with the exception
of option positions that expire within seven (7) business days, upon
validation of an instruction to transfer securities account assets
in whole. See FINRA Rule 11870(d), supra note 6.
    \15\ The industry initiative to shorten the ACATS settlement
cycle and streamline the ACATS process is being led by the Customer
Account Transfer forum (``SIFMA CAT Forum'') of the Securities
Industry and Financial Markets Association, an industry trade group
representing securities firms, banks, and asset management
companies.
    \16\ A Reclaim is a non-standard transfer initiated by a
Delivering Member requesting the transfer of assets that were
mistakenly delivered as part of ACATS. See Section 12(iv) of Rule
50, supra note 5.
    \17\ Residual Credits are residual credit positions which are
received for the benefit of a customer's account by the Delivering
Member after the ACAT process is completed or which, due to a
restriction, were not included in the original asset transfer. See
Section 12 of Rule 50, supra note 5.
    \18\ Partial Accounts are partial accounts held by a Delivering
Member (in the form of cash or securities). Id. For instance, if a
Delivering Member held four asset classes on behalf of a client, a
Partial Account could be a transfer of one of the asset classes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(b) Proposed Rule Change
    NSCC is proposing to modify the Rules to add a provision providing
for the right of the Receiving Member to accelerate the transfer by
either (a) providing an acceleration instruction to NSCC upon receipt
of the customer account asset data list from NSCC and accepting all
assets or (b) deleting MF/IPS Products \19\ and accepting the remaining
assets. NSCC is proposing to add that the transfer that has been
accelerated will be in accelerated status. NSCC is also proposing to
modify the Rules to (i) reduce the adjustments that Delivering Members
can make during an ACATS transfer in accelerated status, (ii) provide
that Reclaims may be initiated with respect to transfers where a non-
Member ACATS participant is a party to the delivery, (iii) add a
provision allowing Receiving Members to delete Fund/Serv Eligible Fund
\20\ assets upon transfer requests for Residual Credits and Partial
Accounts and (iv) make certain clarifications described below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Section 8 of Rule 50 provides that the Receiving Member may
delete ``MF/IPS Products'' upon receipt of an asset list. See
Section 8 of Rule 50, supra note 5. MF/IPS Products are defined as
Fund/Serv Eligible Fund assets and/or IPS Eligible Products. Id. IPS
Eligible Products are defined as an insurance product or a
retirement or other benefit plan or program included in the list for
which provision is made in Section 1.(d) of Rule 3. See definition
of ``IPS Eligible Products'' in Rule 1, supra note 5.
    \20\ A Fund/Serv Eligible Fund is a fund or other pooled
investment entity included in the list for which provision is made
in Section 1.(c) of Rule 3 of the Rules. See definition of ``Fund/
Serv Eligible Fund'' in Rule 1, supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(i) Acceleration
    Acceleration is a current practice pursuant to which a Receiving
Member will accept all or a portion of the assets in a transfer and
choose not to use its right to review during the remaining review
period. When a Receiving Member accelerates on the same day that a
Delivering Member loads the asset list with respect to a transfer
request, the transfer cycle is reduced by one day. Currently, after a
Receiving Member accelerates the transfer, ACATS allows a Delivering
Member to adjust the asset list, which results in the extension of the
review period for an additional day.\21\ For example, if a Delivering
Member adjusts assets after acceleration by a Receiving Member, ACATS
adds back a review day to the transfer timeline. To restore the
acceleration and maintain the same timeline, the Receiving Member must
accelerate again on that same day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See Section 8 of Rule 50, supra note 5, providing that
``[e]ach business day that a Delivering Member causes an adjustment
to be made to the account will give the Receiving Member an
additional one (1) business day to review the account.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NSCC is proposing to formalize the current acceleration process by
providing a right of the Receiving Member to accelerate the transfer
which will place the transfer in accelerated status. A Receiving Member
would accelerate a transfer of a customer account by either (i)
providing an acceleration instruction to NSCC upon receipt of the
customer account asset data list from NSCC and accepting all assets or
(ii) deleting MF/IPS Products and accepting the remaining assets.
    In addition, NSCC is proposing to change the adjustment process for
transfers such that once a transfer is in accelerated status, no
additional adjustments would be allowed to be made by either the
Delivering Member or the Receiving Member, except for deletions of MF/
IPS Products \22\ by the Receiving Member. The proposed change has been
requested by SIFMA CAT Forum, on behalf of the industry, which believes
the change would make the acceleration process more certain by
preventing adjustments during the accelerated status by a Delivering
Member. Preventing adjustments for account transfers in accelerated
status would put the onus on Delivering Members to ensure that the
asset list they are initially providing is accurate. If an asset list
is incorrect, and a Receiving Member accelerates, a Delivering Member
would be able to initiate a Reclaim (discussed below) to retrieve any
assets that were mistakenly added to the initial asset list and
transferred to the Receiving Member.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See supra note 19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NSCC is proposing to effect the proposed change by (i) adding in a
right of the Receiving Member to accelerate in Section 8 of Rule 50 and
to place a transfer in accelerated status and (ii) modifying three
provisions of Section 8 of Rule 50 to restrict the Delivering Member
from making additional modifications once a transfer is in accelerated
status.
(ii) Reclaims
    A Reclaim is a non-standard transfer initiated by a Delivering
Member requesting the transfer of assets that were mistakenly delivered
as part of ACATS.\23\ Reclaims provide a process through ACATS by which
Delivering Members can retrieve assets that were incorrectly sent to
the Receiving Firm through ACATS. The Rules currently provide that a
Reclaim may only be initiated to the extent that the delivery is
between a Member and another Member.\24\ NSCC is proposing to modify
the Rules to provide that a Reclaim may be initiated even if a party to
the delivery is not a Member but is a participant of The Depository
Trust Company (``DTC'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See supra note 16.
    \24\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In 1998, NSCC modified ACATS to allow DTC participants that are not
Members to participate in ACATS.\25\ As a result of the 1998 change,
entities that are not Members, but that are DTC participants, can
participate in ACATS through the use of DTC's services; however, DTC
participants were precluded from using certain non-standard processes,
such as Fail Reversals and Reclaims during its initial implementation.
As usage by DTC participants has increased and matured, the industry
has provided feedback indicating the desire to allow additional
capabilities such as Reclaims to be used for DTC participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 40657 (November 10,
1998), 63 FR 63952 (November 17, 1998) (SR-NSCC-98-06).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response to client requests, NSCC is proposing to modify Section
12(iv) of Rule 50 to remove the requirement that Reclaims may only be
initiated to the extent the delivery is between a Member and another
Member. This proposed change would provide that Reclaims could be made
for assets being delivered to or from DTC participants that participate
in ACATS as well as deliveries to or from Members. Based on industry
feedback, it is believed that allowing Reclaims for deliveries where a
DTC participant is a party to the delivery would improve the efficiency
of the account transfer process by allowing such parties requesting
such Reclaims to use the already established automated ACATS process
currently available for Reclaims between Members and Members.
(iii) Deletion of Fund/Serv Eligible Fund Assets Upon Residual Credits/
Partial Accounts Transfer Request
    ACATS allows the Delivering Member to initiate a transfer of, among
other

things, Residual Credits and Partial Accounts. If a Delivering Member
initiates a transfer of Residual Credits or Partial Accounts, the
Receiving Member may either reject or accept the transfer request but
may not submit corrections to the transfer request.\26\ For full
account transfer requests, in addition to rejecting or accepting the
transfer request, Receiving Members may delete mutual fund products and
insurance products from the transfer request.\27\ Receiving Members may
delete such assets in situations where the Receiving Member is unable
to hold the assets, such as when it is in violation of its credit
policy to hold such assets. NSCC is proposing to add a provision
allowing Receiving Members to delete mutual fund products, or Fund/Serv
Eligible Fund assets, from a transfer request for Partial Accounts and
Residual Credits consistent with the ability to delete such assets from
a full account transfer request.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ Clause 2, Section 12 of Rule 50, supra note 5.
    \27\ See supra note 19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed Rule change would modify clause 2, Section 12 of Rule
50 to provide an exception allowing a Receiving Member to delete Fund/
Serv Eligible Fund assets upon a transfer request for Partial Accounts
and Residual Credits. The proposed change would align the transfer
requests for Partial Accounts and Residual Credits with full account
transfer requests with respect to deleting Fund/Serv Eligible Fund
assets from the transfer requests. Allowing Receiving Members to delete
Fund/Serv Eligible Fund assets would allow Receiving Members to reject
specific assets that they are unable to hold rather than rejecting the
entire transfer request.
    Allowing a partial rejection of mutual fund products in a transfer
request is consistent with full transfer requests and would increase
efficiency in the account transfer process. Without the proposed
change, Receiving Firms that receive a request for transfer that
contains mutual fund products that cannot be held by the Receiving Firm
must reject the transfer request. The Delivering Firm would then be
required to send another transfer request for transfer of Partial
Accounts and Residual Credits through ACATS containing only assets that
can be held by the Receiving Member which would delay the process or
require the transfer of assets outside of the ACATS process. Allowing
the Receiving Members to delete the assets that they are unable to hold
from the transfer requests would prevent unnecessary delay in the
transfer process for Partial Accounts and Residual Credits.
(iv) Clarifications
    NSCC is also proposing to make the following clarifications to the
Rules. NSCC is proposing to change the defined term ``ACAT Service'' to
``ACATS'' and replace the phrase ``the ACAT Service'' with ``ACATS'' in
several places to reflect current conventional use of the name of the
service. NSCC is proposing to add ``Receiving'' in the first sentence
of Section 8 of Rule 50 in order to clarify that the Member referenced
in that clause is a Receiving Member. NSCC is proposing to delete ``(as
defined below)'' after MF/IPS Products in Section 8 of Rule 50 because
the new proposed language relating to a Receiving Member's ability to
accelerate a transfer would first reference that the defined term MF/
IPS Products is defined below. NSCC is proposing to move the defined
term ``Reclaims'' in Section 12(iv) of Rule 50 to make it clear that
Reclaims refer to transfers of ``cash or securities mistakenly
delivered as part of ACATS.'' NSCC is proposing to replace ``Fund/SERV
eligible assets'' with ``Fund/Serv Eligible Fund assets'' in Section
12(3)(ii) and Section 13 of Rule 50, and replace ``Fund/SERV Eligible
Fund asset'' with ``Fund/Serv Eligible Fund asset'' in footnote 4 of
Rule 50, in each case, in order to use the correct defined term for
Fund/Serv Eligible Fund. NSCC is also proposing to delete ``(as defined
in Section 8)'' in footnote 4 of Rule 50 as the definition of Fund/Serv
Eligible Fund asset is not contained in Section 8.
(c) Implementation Timeframe
    NSCC expects to implement the proposed rule changes on February 21,
2020. As proposed, a legend would be added to Rule 50 stating there are
changes that became effective upon filing with the Commission but have
not yet been implemented. The proposed legend also would include
February 21, 2020, as the date on which such changes would be
implemented and the file number of this proposal, and state that, once
this proposal is implemented, the legend would automatically be removed
from Rule 50.
(2) Statutory Basis
    Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act requires, in part, that the Rules
be designed to promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement
of securities transactions.\28\ NSCC believes that each of the proposed
rule changes set forth above are consistent with this provision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    First, providing for a right of a Receiving Member to accelerate a
transfer and to shorten its review period after it has agreed to accept
assets and no longer needs to review would reduce delays in the
transfer cycle by removing unnecessary review time from the process. In
addition, reducing the adjustments that Delivering Members can make
during an ACATS transfer in accelerated status would further reduce
delays caused by such adjustments in a transfer that is in accelerated
status. Reducing delays in the transfer cycle is consistent with the
industry initiative to reduce the ACATS settlement cycle and to
streamline the ACATS process and would bring greater efficiencies to
the account transfer process.
    Second, providing that Reclaims of assets may be initiated for
transfers where a non-Member participant is a party to the delivery
would allow ACATS participants to initiate Reclaims using ACATS for
deliveries where a DTC participant is a party. Allowing such Reclaims
to be processed through the automated ACATS system would be a more
streamlined method of processing the delivery of such assets as opposed
to manually delivering such assets not using ACATS and as such would
bring greater efficiencies to the account transfer process.
    Third, adding a provision allowing Receiving Members to delete
Fund/Serv Eligible Fund assets upon transfer requests for Residual
Credits and Partial Accounts would align such rights with the rights
Receiving Members have to delete such assets in full account transfers.
In addition, the ability to delete such assets would make the process
more efficient by allowing Receiving Members to make such deletions in
the ACATS system rather than having to reject such transfer requests,
requiring the Delivering Member to either resend another transfer
request through ACATS or to manually transfer assets without such
mutual fund products not using ACATS. As such, allowing Receiving
Members to delete Fund/Serv Eligible Fund assets upon transfer requests
for Residual Credits and Partial Accounts would bring greater
efficiencies to the account transfer process.
    Therefore, by bringing greater efficiencies to the account transfer
process as set forth above, NSCC believes the proposed rule change
would promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of
securities transactions, consistent with the

requirements of the Act, in particular Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the
Act.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The clarification changes set forth in II(A)(i)(b)(iv) above are
also consistent with this provision because the proposed clarification
changes would enhance clarity and transparency for participants with
respect to services offered by NSCC allowing ACATS participants to have
a better understanding of the Rules relating to ACATS and the customer
account transfer process. Having clear and accurate Rules would help
Members to better understand their rights and obligations regarding
NSCC's clearance and settlement services. NSCC believes that when
Members better understand their rights and obligations regarding NSCC's
services, they can act in accordance with the Rules. NSCC believes that
better enabling Members to comply with the Rules would promote the
prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions
by NSCC consistent with the requirements of the Act, in particular
Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(B) Clearing Agency's Statement on Burden on Competition

    NSCC does not believe that the proposed rule change would have any
adverse impact, or impose any burden, on competition. NSCC believes
that the proposed changes set forth in II(A)(1)(b)(i)-(iii) above would
bring greater efficiencies to the account transfer process as discussed
above consistent with the industry initiatives to streamline ACATS and
would promote competition by allowing ACATS participants to process
account transfers in a faster, more efficient manner. Allowing ACATS
participants to process account transfers in a more efficient manner
would result in client assets being transferred to the appropriate
Members and DTC participants more quickly. NSCC believes that reducing
the time it takes to transfer account assets to the appropriate Member
or DTC participant using ACATS would allow the Members' or DTC
participants' respective clients to transfer securities in their
transferred accounts more quickly, promoting the ability to trade such
securities and therefore promoting competition in the marketplace.
    NSCC does not believe that the proposed clarification changes set
forth in II(A)(1)(b)(iv) above would have any impact on competition
because such changes are clarifications of the Rules which would
improve the Member's understanding of the Rules and would not otherwise
affect the rights or obligations of NSCC Members.

(C) Clearing Agency's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change
Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    NSCC has not received or solicited any written comments relating to
this proposal. NSCC will notify the Commission of any written comments
received by NSCC.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) \31\ of the Act and paragraph (f) \32\ of Rule 19b 4
thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed
rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ 15 U.S.C 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \32\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NSCC-2020-001 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NSCC-2020-001. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of NSCC and on DTCC's website
(http://dtcc.com/legal/sec-rule-filings.aspx). All comments received
will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-NSCC-2020-001 and should be submitted on
or before February 26, 2020.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-02185 Filed 2-4-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: July 6, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 129)]
[Notices]
[Page 37008-37010]
[DOCID:fr06jy07-64]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0364; FRL-8138-3]

Glutaraldehyde Risk Assessment; Notice of Availability and Risk
Reduction Options

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of EPA's risk
assessment and related documents for the pesticide glutaraldehyde, and
opens a public comment period on these documents. The public is
encouraged to suggest risk management ideas or proposals to address the
risks identified. EPA is developing a Reregistration Eligibility
Decision (RED) for Glutaraldehyde through a modified, 4-Phase public
participation process that the Agency uses to involve the public in
developing pesticide reregistration decisions. Through this program,
EPA is ensuring that all pesticides meet current health and safety
standards.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 4, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0364, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.

Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation (8:30 a.m. to 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays). Special
arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The
Docket Facility telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2007-0364. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the docket without change and may be made available on-line at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information

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

Search.'' Insert the docket ID number where indicated and select the
``Submit'' button. Follow the instructions on the regulations.gov web
site to view the docket index or access available documents. Although

listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g.,
CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are available either in the
electronic docket at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michelle Centra, Antimicrobials
Division (7510P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-
mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

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

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

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

II. Background

A. What Action is the Agency Taking?

    EPA is releasing for public comment its human health and
environmental fate and effects risk assessment and related documents
for glutaraldehyde, an antimicrobial pesticide, and soliciting public
comment on risk management ideas or proposals. Glutaraldehyde is
registered for use in disinfectant, sanitizer, biocide, fungicide,
microbiocide, tuberculocide, and virucide antimicrobial products. EPA
developed the risk assessment and risk characterization for
glutaraldehyde through a modified version of its public process for
making pesticide reregistration eligibility and tolerance reassessment
decisions. Through these programs, EPA is ensuring that pesticides meet
current standards under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA), as amended by the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA).
    As an antimicrobial agent, glutaraldehyde is applied to various
sites, including food handling and food storage establishments such as
commercial egg hatcheries, poultry/livestock equipment and processing
premises, animal feeding and watering equipment; commercial/industrial
buildings and trucks, construction materials, and laundry equipment;
oil recovery drilling muds and secondary oil recovery injection water;
metalworking cutting fluids; commercial/industrial water cooling
systems and evaporative condenser and heat exchanger water systems;
hospital, veterinary and laboratory premises/ equipment in addition to
critical hospital plastic and rubber items; industrial coatings; and in
the manufacture of a variety of materials as a preservative: cleaners,
adhesives, paper and paperboard, water based coatings, latex paints,
inks and dyes. It is not registered for any direct food uses.
Glutaraldehyde containing products are also approved for use in aquatic
areas such as ponds, flood water and sewage water and cooling tower
water.
    EPA is providing an opportunity, through this notice, for
interested parties to provide comments and input on the Agency's risk
assessment for glutaraldehyde. Such comments and input could address,
for example, the availability of additional data to further refine the
risk assessments, such as an aerobic soil metabolism study; nontarget
plant phytotoxicity tests in four species; seedling emergence and
vegetative vigor testing; monitoring data in soil; and water for once-
through cooling tower use, or could address the Agency's risk
assessment methodologies and assumptions as applied to this specific
pesticide.
    Through this notice, EPA also is providing an opportunity for
interested parties to provide risk management proposals or otherwise
comment on risk management for glutaraldehyde. Risks of concern
associated with the use of glutaraldehyde are: Residential handler
inhalation and dermal exposures to paint and laundry detergent;
residential postapplication inhalation exposures to paints and cooling
tower emissions; occupational handler inhalation exposures to hard
surface disinfection in medical, dental, and veterinary offices and
poultry houses; occupational postapplication inhalation exposures to
professional painters; and occupational postapplication dermal
exposures to machinists using metal working fluids, and toxicity to
terrestrial and aquatic organisms. In targeting these risks of concern,
the Agency solicits information on effective and practical risk
reduction measures.
    EPA seeks to achieve environmental justice, the fair treatment and
meaningful involvement of all people, regardless of race, color,
national origin, or income, in the development,

implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies. To help address potential environmental justice issues, the
Agency seeks information on any groups or segments of the population
who, as a result of their location, cultural practices, or other
factors, may have atypical, unusually high exposure to glutaraldehyde,
compared to the general population.
    EPA is applying the principles of public participation to all
pesticides undergoing reregistration and tolerance reassessment. The
Agency's Pesticide Tolerance Reassessment and Reregistration; Public
Participation Process, published in the Federal Register on May 14,
2004 (69 FR 26819) (FRL-7357-9), explains that in conducting these
programs, the Agency is tailoring its public participation process to
be commensurate with the level of risk, extent of use, complexity of
the issues, and degree of public concern associated with each
pesticide. For glutaraldehyde, a modified, 4-Phase process with 1
comment period and ample opportunity for public consultation seems
appropriate in view of its refined risk assessment. However, if as a
result of comments received during this comment period EPA finds that
additional issues warranting further discussion are raised, the Agency
may lengthen the process and include a second comment period, as
needed.
    All comments should be submitted using the methods in ADDRESSES,
and must be received by EPA on or before the closing date. Comments
will become part of the Agency Docket for glutaraldehyde. Comments
received after the close of the comment period will be marked ``late.''
EPA is not required to consider these late comments.

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

    Section 4(g)(2) of FIFRA as amended directs that, after submission
of all data concerning a pesticide active ingredient, ``the
Administrator shall determine whether pesticides containing such active
ingredient are eligible for reregistration,'' before calling in
product-specific data on individual end-use products and either
reregistering products or taking other ``appropriate regulatory
action.''
    Section 408(q) of the FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 346a(q), requires EPA to
review tolerances and exemptions for pesticide residues in effect as of
August 2, 1996, to determine whether the tolerance or exemption meets
the requirements of section 408(b)(2) or (c)(2) of FFDCA. This review
was completed by August 3, 2006.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Pesticides and pests.

    Dated: June 27, 2007.
Betty Shackleford,
Acting Director, Antimicrobials Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. E7-12996 Filed 7-5-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S