[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 36 (Monday, February 24, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10174-10175]
[FR Doc No: 2014-03756]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID: 2013-0046; OMB No. 1660-0029]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB
Review; Comment Request

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) will submit the
information collection abstracted below to the Office of Management and
Budget for review and clearance in accordance with the requirements of
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The submission will describe the
nature of the information collection, the categories of respondents,
the estimated burden (i.e., the time, effort and resources used by
respondents to respond) and cost, and the actual data collection
instruments FEMA will use.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before March 26, 2014.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments on the proposed information
collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office
of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to the Desk
Officer for the Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency
Management Agency, and sent via electronic mail to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or faxed to<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or
copies of the information collection should be made to Director,
Records Management Division, 1800 South Bell Street, Arlington, VA
20598-3005, facsimile number<PHONE_NUMBER>, or email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Collection of Information

    Title: Approval and Coordination of Requirements to Use the NETC
Extracurricular for Training Activities.
    Type of information collection: Extension, without change, of a

currently approved information collection.
    OMB Number: 1660-0029.
    Form Titles and Numbers: FEMA Form 119-17-1, Request for Housing
Accommodations; FEMA Form 119-17-2, Request for Use of NETC Facilities.
    Abstract: FEMA established the National Emergency Training Center
(NETC), located in Emmitsburg, Maryland to offer training for the
purpose of emergency preparedness. The NETC site has facilities and
housing available for those participating in emergency preparedness.
When training space and/or housing is required for those attending the
training, an entity must request use of these areas in advance. This
collection provides the mechanism to receive such requests.
    Affected Public: Not-for-profit institutions; Federal Government;
State, Local or Tribal Government; Individuals or households; and
Business or other for-profit. Estimated Number of Respondents: 60.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 12 hours.
    Estimated Cost: The estimated annual cost to respondents for the
hour burden is $370.00. There are no annual costs to respondents
operations and maintenance costs for technical services. There are no
annual start-up or capital costs. The cost to the Federal Government is
$10,843.00.

    Dated: February 7, 2014.
Charlene D. Myrthil,
Director, Records Management Division, Mission Support Bureau, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2014-03756 Filed 2-21-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-45-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 154 (Friday, August 9, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48701-48703]
[FR Doc No: 2013-19328]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2013-0002; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-1340]

Proposed Flood Hazard Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Comments are requested on proposed flood hazard
determinations, which may include additions or modifications of any
Base Flood Elevation (BFE), base flood depth, Special Flood Hazard Area
(SFHA) boundary or zone designation, or regulatory floodway on the
Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and where applicable, in the
supporting Flood Insurance Study (FIS) reports for the communities
listed in the table below. The purpose of this notice is to seek
general information and comment regarding the preliminary FIRM, and
where applicable, the FIS report that the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) has provided to the affected communities. The FIRM and
FIS report are the basis of the floodplain management measures that the
community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of having in
effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for participation in the
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). In addition, the FIRM and FIS
report, once effective, will be used by insurance agents and others to
calculate appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings
and the contents of those buildings.

DATES: Comments are to be submitted on or before November 7, 2013.

ADDRESSES: The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, the FIS report
for each community are available for inspection at both the online
location and the respective Community Map Repository address listed in
the tables below. Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS
report for each community are accessible online through the FEMA Map
Service Center at www.msc.fema.gov for comparison.
    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FEMA-B-1340, to
Luis Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering Management Branch, Federal Insurance
and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC
20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Luis Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering
Management Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration,
FEMA, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
(email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or visit the FEMA Map Information
eXchange (FMIX) online at www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FEMA proposes to make flood hazard
determinations for each community listed below, in accordance with
section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C.
4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a).
    These proposed flood hazard determinations, together with the
floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum
that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the
community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent
in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any
time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies
established by other Federal, State, or regional entities. These flood
hazard determinations are used to meet the floodplain management
requirements of the NFIP and also are used to calculate the appropriate
flood insurance premium rates for new buildings built after the FIRM
and FIS report become effective.
    The communities affected by the flood hazard determinations are
provided in the tables below. Any request for reconsideration of the
revised flood hazard information shown on the Preliminary FIRM and FIS
report that satisfies the data requirements outlined in 44 CFR 67.6(b)
is considered an appeal. Comments unrelated to the flood hazard
determinations also will be considered before the FIRM and FIS report
become effective.
    Use of a Scientific Resolution Panel (SRP) is available to
communities in support of the appeal resolution process. SRPs are
independent panels of experts in hydrology, hydraulics, and other
pertinent sciences established to review conflicting scientific and
technical data and provide recommendations for resolution. Use of the
SRP only may be exercised after FEMA and local communities have been
engaged in a collaborative consultation process for at least 60 days
without a mutually acceptable resolution of an appeal. Additional
information regarding the SRP process can be found online at http://floodsrp.org/pdfs/srp_fact_sheet.pdf.
    The watersheds and/or communities affected are listed in the tables
below. The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, FIS report for each
community are available for inspection at both the online location and
the respective Community Map Repository address listed in the tables.
Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS report for each
community are accessible online through the FEMA Map Service Center at
www.msc.fema.gov for comparison.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Community map repository
               Community                             address
------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Story County, Iowa, and Incorporated Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maps Available for Inspection Online at: www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata preliminaryfloodhazarddata
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Ames...........................  Department of Planning and
                                          Housing, City Hall, 515 Clarke
                                          Avenue, Ames, IA 50010.
Unincorporated Areas of Story County...  Story County Planning and
                                          Zoning Department, 900 Sixth
                                          Street, Nevada, IA 50201.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Warren County, Iowa, and Incorporated Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata preliminaryfloodhazarddata
------------------------------------------------------------------------

City of Carlisle.......................  City Hall, 195 North First
                                          Street, Carlisle, IA 50047.
City of Cumming........................  City Hall, 649 North 44th
                                          Street, Cumming, IA 50061.
City of Des Moines.....................  City Hall, 400 Robert D Ray
                                          Drive, Des Moines, IA 50309.
City of Norwalk........................  City Hall, 705 North Avenue,
                                          Norwalk, IA 50211.
Unincorporated Areas of Warren County..  County Courthouse, 301 North
                                          Buxton Street, Suite 212,
                                          Indianola, IA 50125.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Pottawatomie County, Kansas, and Incorporated Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maps Available for Inspection Online at: www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata preliminaryfloodhazarddata
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of St. George.....................  City Hall, 220 First Street,
                                          St. George, KS 66535.
Unincorporated Areas of Pottawatomie     County Office Building, 207
 County.                                  North First Street,
                                          Westmoreland, KS 66549.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Kandiyohi County, Minnesota, and Incorporated Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maps Available for Inspection Online at: www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata preliminaryfloodhazarddata
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Lake Lillian...................  City Hall, 531 Lakeview Street,
                                          Lake Lillian, MN 56253.
City of New London.....................  City Hall, 20 1st Avenue
                                          Southwest, New London, MN
                                          56273.
City of Raymond........................  City Office, 208 Cofield
                                          Street, Raymond, MN 56282.
City of Regal..........................  Mayor's Residence, 14465 293rd
                                          Avenue Northeast, Belgrade, MN
                                          56312.
City of Spicer.........................  City Hall, 217 Hillcrest
                                          Avenue, Spicer, MN 56288.
City of Willmar........................  City Office Building, 333 6th
                                          Street Southwest, Willmar, MN
                                          56201.
Unincorporated Areas of Kandiyohi        Kandiyohi County Office
 County.                                  Building, 400 Benson Avenue
                                          Southwest, Willmar, MN 56201.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Upper Ohio-Shade Watershed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Athens County, Ohio, and Incorporated Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://www.starr-team.com/starr/RegionalWorkspaces/RegionV/AthensOH/Preliminary%20Maps/Forms/AllItems.aspx
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Athens.........................  8 East Washington Street,
                                          Athens, OH 45701.
City of Nelsonville....................  211 Lake Hope Drive,
                                          Nelsonville, OH 45764.
Unincorporated Areas of Athens County..  28 Curan Drive, Athens, OH
                                          45701.
Village of Chauncey....................  42 Converse Street, Chauncey,
                                          OH 45719.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Multnomah County, Oregon, and Incorporated Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://www.starr-team.com/starr/RegionalWorkspaces/RegionX/GreshamPMR/Preliminary%20Maps/Forms/AllItems.aspx
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Fairview.......................  City Hall, 1300 Northeast
                                          Village Street, Fairview, OR
                                          97024.
City of Gresham........................  City Hall, Community
                                          Development Office, 1333
                                          Northwest Eastman Parkway,
                                          Gresham, OR 97030.
Unincorporated Areas of Multnomah        Multnomah County Office of Land
 County.                                  Use and Planning, 1600
                                          Southeast 190th Avenue,
                                          Portland, OR 97214.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             King County, Washington, and Incorporated Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://www.starr-team.com/starr/RegionalWorkspaces/RegionX/KingCountyCoastal/SitePages/Home.aspx
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Bothell........................  City Hall, 18305 101st Avenue
                                          Northeast, Bothell, WA 98011.
City of Burien.........................  City Hall, 400 Southwest 152nd
                                          Street, Suite 300, Burien, WA
                                          98166.
City of Des Moines.....................  City Engineering Department,
                                          21650 11th Avenue South, Suite
                                          D, Des Moines, WA 98198.
City of Federal Way....................  City Hall, 33325 8th Avenue
                                          South, Federal Way, WA 98003.
City of Kenmore........................  City Hall, 18120 68th Avenue
                                          Northeast, Kenmore, WA 98028.
City of Kirkland.......................  City Hall, 123 5th Avenue,
                                          Kirkland, WA 98033.
City of Normandy Park..................  City Hall, 801 Southwest 174th
                                          Street, Normandy Park, WA
                                          98166.
City of Redmond........................  City Hall, 15670 Northest 85th
                                          Street, Redmond, WA 98703.
City of Seattle........................  City Hall, 600 4th Avenue,
                                          Seattle, WA 98124.
City of Shoreline......................  City Hall, 17500 Midvale Avenue
                                          North, Shoreline, WA 98133.
City of Tukwila........................  City Hall, 6200 Southcenter
                                          Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188.
City of Woodinville....................  City Hall, 17301 133rd Avenue
                                          Northeast, Woodinville, WA
                                          98072.
Unincorporated Areas of King County....  Department of Water and Land
                                          Resources, 201 South Jackson
                                          Street, Suite 600, Seattle, WA
                                          98104.

             Dane County, Wisconsin, and Incorporated Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maps Available for Inspection Online at: www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata preliminaryfloodhazarddata
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Edgerton.......................  City Hall, 12 Albion Street,
                                          Edgerton, WI 53534.
City of Madison........................  City Hall, 210 Martin Luther
                                          King Jr. Boulevard, Room 403,
                                          Madison, WI 53703.
City of Middleton......................  City Hall, 7426 Hubbard Avenue,
                                          Middleton, WI 53562.
City of Stoughton......................  City Hall, 381 East Main
                                          Street, Stoughton, WI 53589.
City of Sun Prairie....................  City Hall, 300 East Main
                                          Street, Sun Prairie, WI 53590.
Unincorporated Areas of Dane County....  City County Building, 210
                                          Martin Luther King Jr.
                                          Boulevard, Room 116, Madison,
                                          WI 53703.
Village of Cambridge...................  Village Hall, 200 South Spring
                                          Street, Cambridge, WI 53523.
Village of Cottage Grove...............  Village Hall, 221 East Cottage
                                          Grove Road, Cottage Grove, WI
                                          53527.
Village of De Forest...................  Village Hall, 306 DeForest
                                          Street, DeForest, WI 53532.
Village of Deerfield...................  Village Hall, 4 North Main
                                          Street, Deerfield, WI 53531.
Village of Marshall....................  Village Hall, 130 South Pardee
                                          Street, Marshall, WI 53559.
Village of McFarland...................  Village Hall, 5915 Milwaukee
                                          Street, McFarland, WI 53558.
Village of Oregon......................  Village Hall, 117 Spring
                                          Street, Oregon, WI 53575.
Village of Rockdale....................  Village Hall, 148 Water Street,
                                          Rockdale, WI 53523.
Village of Waunakee....................  Village Hall, 500 West Main
                                          Street, Waunakee, WI 53597.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, ``Flood
Insurance.'')

    Date: July 26, 2013.
Roy E. Wright,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Mitigation, Department of Homeland
Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2013-19328 Filed 8-8-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-12-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 226 (Monday, November 27, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 55943-55945]
[FR Doc No: 2017-25310]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2017-0666; Airspace Docket No. 17-ANM-15]

Amendment of Class D and Class E Airspace; Pueblo, CO

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends Class D airspace, Class E surface area
airspace, and Class E airspace upward from 700 feet above the surface
at Pueblo Memorial Airport, Pueblo, CO. Also, the part-time Notice to
Airmen (NOTAM) information is removed from Class E airspace designated
as an extension, and the geographic coordinates for Pueblo Memorial
Airport in the associated Class D and E airspace areas are amended to
match the FAA's aeronautical database. A biennial review found these
changes are necessary to accommodate airspace redesign for the safety
and management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations within the
National Airspace System. An editorial change also is made to the Class
D airspace and Class E surface area airspace legal descriptions
replacing ``Airport/Facility Directory'' with the term ``Chart
Supplement.''

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, February 1, 2018. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
Title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual
revision of FAA Order 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.11B, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can
contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of this material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to
https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Clark, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center, 1601
Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority
described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that
section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the
use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the
efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority as it modifies Class D and E airspace at Pueblo Memorial
Airport, Pueblo, CO, in support of instrument flight rules operations
at the airport.

History

    On August 3, 2017, the FAA published in the Federal Register (82 FR
36103) Docket FAA-2017-0666, a notice of proposed rulemaking to modify
Class D airspace, Class E surface area airspace, Class E airspace
designated as an extension, and Class E airspace extending upward from
700 feet above the surface at Pueblo Memorial Airport, Pueblo, CO.
Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking
effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No
comments were received.
    Class D and E airspace designations are published in paragraph
5000, 6002, 6004, and 6005, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.11B, dated
August 3, 2017, and effective September 15, 2017, which is incorporated
by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class D and E airspace designations
listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order 7400.11B, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2017, and effective September 15,
2017. FAA Order 7400.11B is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11B lists Class A,
B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Rule

    The FAA is amending Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 by modifying Class D airspace, Class E surface area airspace,
Class E airspace designated as an extension, and Class E airspace
extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Pueblo Memorial
Airport, Pueblo, CO.
    Class D airspace and Class E surface area airspace are reduced to
within a 5.1-mile radius (from 5.6 miles) of Pueblo Memorial Airport.
    The Class E airspace designated as an extension to a Class D or
Class E surface area east of the airport is modified to a 7.2 mile wide
segment (from 7 miles) extending to 11.3 miles (from 11.4 miles) east
of the airport; the segment west of the airport is removed as it is not
necessary to support current operations; and a segment is established
north of the airport within 1.6 miles west and 1.3 miles east of the
358[deg] bearing from the airport extending from the 5.1 mile radius to
6.7 miles north of the airport.
    Also, this action eliminates the following language from the legal
description of Class E airspace designated as an extension to a Class D
or Class E surface area at the airport: ``This Class E airspace is
effective during the specific dates and times established in advance by
a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be
continuously published in the Airport/Facility Directory,'' since the
airspace remains in effect full time.
    Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet is reduced to
within a 7.6-mile radius of the Pueblo Memorial Airport with extensions
to 12 miles north and 12.3 miles east of the airport (from a 21.8-mile
radius with an extension to 28.2 miles east). Also, this action removes
Class E airspace extending upward from 1,200 feet above the surface
since the airspace is wholly contained within the Denver Class E en
route airspace area and duplication is not necessary.
    Additionally, this action updates the geographic coordinates for
Pueblo Memorial Airport and replaces the outdated term ``Airport/
Facility Directory'' with the term ``Chart Supplement'' in the
associated Class D and Class E airspace legal descriptions. This
airspace redesign is necessary for the safety and management of IFR
operations at the airport.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is
non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore: (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); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 5-6.5a. This airspace action is not expected to
cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1   [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11B,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2017, and
effective September 15, 2017, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace.

* * * * *

ANM CO D Pueblo, CO [Amended]

Pueblo Memorial Airport, CO
    (Lat. 38[deg]17'24'' N., long. 104[deg]29'53'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including
7,200 feet MSL within a 5.1-mile radius of Pueblo Memorial Airport.
This Class D airspace area is effective during the specific dates
and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The
effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in
the Chart Supplement.

Paragraph 6002 Class E Airspace Designated as Surface Areas.

* * * * *

ANM CO E2 Pueblo, CO [Amended]

Pueblo Memorial Airport, CO
    (Lat. 38[deg]17'24'' N., long. 104[deg]29'53'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within a 5.1-
mile radius of Pueblo

Memorial Airport. This Class E airspace area is effective during the
specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to
Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be continuously
published in the Chart Supplement.

Paragraph 6004 Class E Airspace Designated as an Extension to a
Class D or Class E Surface Area.

* * * * *

ANM CO E4 Pueblo, CO [Amended]

Pueblo Memorial Airport, CO
    (Lat. 38[deg]17'24'' N., long. 104[deg]29'53'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within 3.6 miles each side of the 081[deg] bearing from Pueblo
Memorial Airport extending from the 5.1-mile radius of the airport
to 11.3 miles east of the airport, and within 1.6 miles west and 1.3
miles east of the 358[deg] bearing from the airport extending from
the 5.1-mile radius of the airport to 6.7 miles north of the
airport.

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

ANM CO E5 Pueblo, CO [Amended]

Pueblo Memorial Airport, CO
    (Lat. 38[deg]17'24'' N., long. 104[deg]29'53'' W.)

    That airspace upward from 700 feet above the surface within a
7.6-mile radius of Pueblo Memorial Airport, and within 2.2 miles
west and 1.8 miles east of the 358[deg] bearing from the airport
extending to 12 miles north of the airport, and within 3.8 miles
each side of the 081[deg] bearing from the airport extending to 12.3
miles east of the airport.

    Issued in Seattle, Washington, on November 14, 2017.
Brian J. Johnson,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2017-25310 Filed 11-24-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 148 (Tuesday, August 2, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50777-50780]
[FR Doc No: 2016-18205]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-78427; File No. SR-BOX-2016-34]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BOX Options Exchange LLC; Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To
Amend the Fee Schedule on the BOX Market LLC (``BOX'') Options Facility

July 27, 2016.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on July 18, 2016, BOX Options Exchange LLC (the ``Exchange'')
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 Exchange. The Exchange filed the
proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act,\3\
and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposal
effective upon filing with the Commission. 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)(ii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange is filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') a proposed rule change to amend the Fee Schedule to on
the BOX Market LLC (``BOX'') options facility. While changes to the fee
schedule pursuant to this proposal will be effective upon filing, the
changes will become operative on August 1, 2016. The text of the
proposed rule change is available from the principal office of the
Exchange, at the Commission's Public Reference Room and also on the
Exchange's Internet Web site at http://boxexchange.com.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange 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 Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to make a number of changes to the BOX Fee
Schedule.
Exchange Fees
PIP and COPIP Transactions
    The Exchange proposes to remodel the current fee structure for PIP
and COPIP Transactions. Currently, PIP and COPIP transactions are
assessed fees based upon the account type of the Participant and
whether the order is a: (i) PIP or COPIP Order; (ii) Improvement Order
in PIP or COPIP; or (iii) Primary Improvement Order. The current PIP
and COPIP Transactions fee structure is as follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Account type
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Professional
                                    Public customer        customer          Broker dealer       Market maker
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PIP Order or COPIP Order \5\....  $0.00.............  $0.15.............  $0.15.............  $0.15.
Improvement Order in PIP or       $0.15.............  $0.37.............  $0.37.............  $0.30.
 COPIP \6\.
Primary Improvement Order \7\...  See Section I. B.1  See Section I. B.1  See Section I. B.1  See Section I.
                                                                                B.1.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    First, the Exchange proposes to restructure the PIP and COPIP
Transactions fee schedule to differentiate between fees assessed in
Penny and Non-Penny Pilot Classes. Next, the Exchange proposes to
adjust the Improvement Order fees assessed for Broker Dealers,
Professional Customers and Market Makers. Specifically, the Exchange
proposes to establish a fee of $0.12 for Broker Dealers, Professional
Customer and Market Maker Improvement Orders in Penny Pilot Classes.
For Improvement Orders in Non-Penny Pilot Classes, the Exchange
proposes to establish a fee of $0.38 for Market Makers, Broker Dealers
and Professional Customers. Public Customer Improvement Order fees will
remain the same, as well as the PIP and COPIP Order fees for all
Participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ A PIP Order or COPIP Order is a Customer Order (an agency
order for the account of either a customer or a broker-dealer)
designated for the PIP or COPIP, respectively.
    \6\ An Improvement Order is a response to a PIP or COPIP
auction.
    \7\ A Primary Improvement Order is the matching contra order
submitted to the PIP or COPIP on the opposite side of the PIP or
COPIP order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed PIP and COPIP fee structure will be as follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     PIP and COPIP orders \8\         Improvement orders \9\
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
                  Account type                      Penny pilot      Non-penny      Penny pilot      Non-penny
                                                      classes      pilot classes      classes      pilot classes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Public Customer.................................           $0.00           $0.00           $0.15           $0.15
Professional Customer or Broker Dealer..........            0.15            0.15            0.12            0.38
Market Maker....................................            0.15            0.15            0.12            0.38
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange is also proposing to remove the Primary Improvement
Order row in the schedule which references the Tiered Fee Schedule for
Initiating Participants in Section 1.B.1 as well as amend the footnotes
in the PIP and COPIP Transactions subsection to reflect to revised fee
structure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ A PIP Order or COPIP Order is a Customer Order (an agency
order for the account of either a customer or a broker-dealer)
designated for the PIP or COPIP, respectively.
    \9\ An Improvement Order is a response to a PIP or COPIP
auction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tiered Fee Schedule for Initiating Participants
    The Exchange proposes to rename Section I.B.1 from ``Tiered Fee
Schedule for Initiating Participants'' to ``Primary Improvement Order''
to clarify that this section reflects the per contract execution fees
for Primary Improvement Orders. The Exchange is also proposing to amend
the footnotes in proposed Section I.B.1 to include the definition of a
Primary Improvement Order.
BOX Volume Rebate
    The Exchange proposes to amend the BOX Volume Rebate (``BVR'') in
Section I.B.2 of the Fee Schedule.
    Under the current BVR, the Exchange offers a tiered per contract
rebate for all PIP Orders and COPIP Orders of 100 contracts and under.
PIP and COPIP executions of 100 contracts and under are awarded a per
contract rebate calculated on a monthly basis by totaling the
Participant's PIP and COPIP volume submitted to BOX, relative to the
total national Customer volume in multiply-listed options classes. The
current per contract rebate for Participants in PIP and COPIP
Transactions under the BVR is:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Percentage thresholds of         Per contract rebate (all
                                                   national customer volume in            account types)
                     Tier                        multiply-listed options classes -------------------------------
                                                            (monthly)                   PIP            COPIP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.............................................  0.000% to 0.159%................         ($0.00)         ($0.00)
2.............................................  0.160% to 0.339%................         ($0.04)         ($0.02)
3.............................................  0.340% to 0.999%................         ($0.11)         ($0.04)
4.............................................  1.000% to 1.249%................         ($0.14)         ($0.06)
5.............................................  1.250% and Above................         ($0.18)         ($0.06)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    First, the Exchange is proposing to lower the per contract rebate
for PIP and COPIP Orders of 100 and under that trade solely with their
contra order. Specifically, the Exchange is proposing to lower the
rebate to $0.03 per contract from $0.05 per contract. Next, the
Exchange proposes to lower the per contract rebates associated with
each volume tier in PIP transactions. The per contract rebates
associated with COPIP Orders remain unchanged. The new BVR set forth in
Section I.B.2 of the BOX Fee Schedule will be as follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Percentage thresholds of         Per contract rebate (all
                                                   national customer volume in            account types)
                     Tier                        multiply-listed options classes -------------------------------
                                                            (monthly)                   PIP            COPIP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.............................................  0.000% to 0.159%................         ($0.00)         ($0.00)
2.............................................  0.160% to 0.339%................         ($0.02)         ($0.02)
3.............................................  0.340% to 0.999%................         ($0.04)         ($0.04)
4.............................................  1.000% to 1.249%................         ($0.07)         ($0.06)
5.............................................  1.250% and Above................         ($0.10)         ($0.06)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Liquidity Fees and Credits
    The Exchange then proposes to amend Section II.A. of the BOX Fee
Schedule, liquidity fees and credits for PIP and COPIP transactions.
Specifically, the Exchange proposes to increase the fees and credits
for PIP and COPIP transactions in Penny and Non-Penny Pilot Classes.
The Exchange proposes to raise the fees for adding liquidity in PIP and
COPIP Transactions to $0.77 from $0.75 in Non-Penny Pilot Classes, and
to $0.38 from $0.35 in Penny Pilot Classes. The Exchange also proposes
to increase the credits for removing liquidity in PIP and COPIP
Transactions. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to increase the
credit to $0.77 from $0.75 in Non-Penny Pilot Classes, and to $0.38
from $0.35 in Penny Pilot Classes.
    Lastly, the Exchange also proposes to make non-substantive
technical chances

[sic] to renumber the footnotes within the BOX Fee Schedule.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with the
requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act, in general, and Section
6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5)of the Act,\10\ in particular, in that it provides
for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other
charges among BOX Participants and other persons using its facilities
and does not unfairly discriminate between customers, issuers, brokers
or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Exchange Fees
PIP and COPIP Transactions
    The Exchange believes that remodeling the fee structure for PIP and
COPIP Transactions is reasonable, equitable, and not unfairly
discriminatory. In particular, the proposed revisions will allow the
Exchange to apply separate fees for transactions in Penny and Non-Penny
Pilot Classes, a distinction that is made in many other section [sic]
of the BOX Fee Schedule, including Section I.A (Non-Auction
Transactions) and Section III.A (All Complex Orders).
    The Exchange also believes the proposed fees for Broker Dealers,
Professional Customer and Market Makers submitting Improvement Orders
in Penny and Non-Penny Pilot classes are reasonable equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory. Professional Customers and Broker Dealers are
currently charged a flat fee of $0.37 for Improvement Orders, while
Market Makers are charged a flat fee of $0.30. The proposal lowers the
Improvement Order fees for these Participants to $0.12 for Penny Pilot
Classes, while slightly raising the fee for Non-Penny Pilot Classes to
$0.38. The Exchange believes these fees are reasonable as they are in
line with other exchanges in the industry.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See NASDAQ OMX PHLX, (``PHLX'') Pricing Schedule, where
Responders to the PIXL are charged $0.25.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tiered Fee Schedule for Initiating Participants
    The Exchange believes that the proposal to rename sections [sic]
I.B.1 to ``Primary Improvement Order is reasonable equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory, as it will provide further clarity to the fee
schedule and will eliminate any potential investor confusion.
BOX Volume Rebate
    The Exchange believes the proposed changes to the BVR are
reasonable, equitable and non-discriminatory. The BVR was adopted to
attract Public Customer order flow to the Exchange by offering these
Participants incentives to submit their PIP and COPIP Orders to the
Exchange. The Exchange believes providing a rebate to Participants that
reach a certain volume threshold is equitable and non-discriminatory as
the rebate will apply to all Participants uniformly.
    The Exchange believes it is reasonable, equitable and non-
discriminatory to reduce the flat rebate in the BVR for PIP Orders and
COPIP Orders of 100 and under contracts that trade solely with their
contra order. The Exchange recently amended the BVR to introduce the
flat $0.05 rebate, regardless of tier.\12\ The Exchange now believes it
is reasonable to lower the flat rebate to $0.03 per contract,
regardless of tier. The BVR is intended to incentivize Participants to
direct Customer order flow to the Exchange, and while the Exchange
believes that the potentially higher BVR rebate tiers are not necessary
for internalized PIP Orders that only trade against their contra order,
a flat $0.03 rebate will continue to be the appropriate incentive for
these orders. The Exchange also believes that the proposed flat $0.03
rebate for internalized COPIP Orders that only trade against their
contra order will continue to be a reasonable incentive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Securities Exchange Release No. 77694 (April 22, 2016),
81 FR 25460 (April 28, 2016) (Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness SR-BOX-2016-17).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that lowering the rebates associated with
each volume tier for PIP transactions is reasonable. Once the volume
threshold is met the Exchange will continue to pay rebates on
applicable PIP Orders. The Exchange also believes the proposed rebates
are equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because Participants are
eligible to receive the rebate provided they meet the volume and order
type requirements. The Exchange believes that applying the rebate to
PIP Orders will continue to provide these Participants with an added
incentive to transact a greater number of Public Customer Orders on the
Exchange to the benefit of all market participants.
Liquidity Fees and Credits
    BOX believes that the changes to PIP and COPIP transaction
liquidity fees and credits are equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory in that they apply to all categories of participants and
across all account types. The Exchange notes that liquidity fees and
credits on BOX are meant to offset one another in any particular
transaction. The liquidity fees and credits do not directly result in
revenue to BOX, but simply allow BOX to provide incentives to
Participants to attract order flow. The Exchange also believes the
liquidity fees and credits are reasonable and competitive when compared
to similar fees at competing venues.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange believes the
proposed fee changes are reasonably designed to enhance competition in
BOX transactions, particularly auction transactions.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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)(ii) of the Exchange Act \13\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2)
thereunder,\14\ because it establishes or changes a due, or fee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend the rule
change if it appears to the Commission that the action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
would otherwise further the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

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-BOX-2016-34 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BOX-2016-34. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-BOX-2016-34, and should be
submitted on or before August 23, 2016.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2016-18205 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


Site Visit

Heritage Environmental Services LLC

Indianapolis Treatment Center

May 18, 2006

On May 18, 2006, representatives of EPA’s Office of Solid Waste
visited Heritage Environmental Service’s Indianapolis Treatment Center
to discuss their recycling operations. In attendance:

Charlotte Mooney	EPA

Amy Lile		EPA

Kathy Blanton		EPA

Craig Hogarth		Heritage (corporate compliance)

Ralph Roper		Heritage

James E. Etzel		Heritage

Dan Murray		Indiana DEM			Assistant Commissioner

Fred Steward		Heritage-Micronutrients	President

Dave Berry 		Indiana DEM (hw policy)

Paula Bansch		Indiana DEM			Hazardous Waste Permits

Mike Karpinski	Heritage			Quality Manager

Gary Romesser	Indiana DEM

Steven Danenman	Heritage

Winde Hamrick	Heritage			Midwest Regional Manager

Tony Kriech		Heritage			Director of Research

Gary Lindgren		Heritage			VP of Compliance

Representatives of Heritage Environmental and EPA discussed the history
of Heritage’s various companies and their position in the
environmental services industry as well the various operations of the
different companies within Heritage, particularly Heritage Slag Products
LLC, Heritage Synfuel Binders, and Heritage Crystal Clean. EPA and
Heritage also discussed Heritage’s research and development, its
relations with the state of Indiana in its operations, the challenges of
recycling, and the proposed rule on the definition of solid waste.
Heritage expressed concern that a rule that differentiates between
onsite and offsite recycling processes may hinder innovation because the
need to modify permits if a material has to be stored in new tanks. EPA
also took a tour of the facility which included research and sampling
laboratories, materials arrival areas, waste and product storage areas,
and recycling equipment. In addition, EPA toured the neighboring
facility of Micronutrients, also owned by Heritage.


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 66 (Wednesday, April 6, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 18995-19001]
[FR Doc No: 2011-7900]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 168

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0607; FRL-8862-2]
RIN 2070-AJ53

Pesticides; Regulation to Clarify Labeling of Pesticides for
Export

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to revise the regulations on labeling of
pesticides and devices intended for export. Internal review of the
regulations revealed that the current regulations needed clarification
and restructuring to increase understandability and ease of use.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 6, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ--OPP-2009-0607, 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 Facility'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-
2009-0607. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the docket without change and may be made

available on-line at hitp://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 regulations.gov Web site is an
``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an 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 at http://www.regulations.gov. 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: Vera Au, Field and External Affairs
Division (7506P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-
mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you export a
pesticide product, a pesticide device, or an active ingredient used in
producing a pesticide. Potentially affected entities may include, but
are not limited to: Pesticide and other agricultural chemical
manufacturing (NAICS code 325320), e.g., Pesticides manufacturing,
Insecticides manufacturing, Herbicides manufacturing, Fungicides
manufacturing, etc.
    This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular
entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.

B. 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 Register date 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?

    Section 17(a)(1) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) requires that unregistered pesticides and
devices intended for export be subject to several provisions that
include labeling, production reports, inspection of establishments, and
reporting and recordkeeping. These provisions are contained in 40 CFR
168.65 and 168.85. FIFRA section 17(a) further requires that exporters
obtain a purchaser acknowledgement statement (PAS) before exporting an
unregistered pesticide (but not a device). The requirements related to
PAS are contained in 40 CFR 168.75.
    On February 18, 1993, regulations interpreting the FIFRA
requirements about the export of unregistered pesticides and devices
were published in the Federal Register (58 FR 9085) as subpart D of 40
CFR part 168. Subpart D implements FIFRA sections 17(a) and 17(b).
    The current regulations in subpart D have not been changed since
1993. Recently, an EPA internal review determined that the 1993
regulations are not as clear as EPA intended and that the resulting
ambiguity might have led to uncertainty in compliance. To clarify the
regulations in order to aid compliance, EPA decided to propose adding a
more specific labeling requirement. In addition, EPA is restructuring
the regulations to increase ease of use. Clarification and
restructuring of the current regulations are administrative actions
with no significant policy issues.
    This proposed rule will supplement the requirements of 40 CFR
168.65 Pesticide export label and labeling requirements.

B. What is the agency's authority for taking this action?

    EPA is authorized under FIFRA to regulate the sale, distribution,
and use

of pesticide products and devices through a licensing (registration)
scheme. This action is issued under the authority of section 17 of
FIFRA (7 U.S.C. 136-136y).
    Executive Order 12988, entitled Civil Justice Reform (61 FR 4729,
February 7, 1996), requires agencies that are reviewing existing
regulations take the necessary steps to eliminate drafting errors and
ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and provide a clear legal
standard for affected conduct.

III. Purpose and Scope of Proposal

    EPA is proposing to clarify, restructure, and add specificity to
labeling regulations for the export of unregistered pesticide products
and devices according to Executive Order 12988 to eliminate ambiguity
and simplify EPA regulations. This action is discretionary and is not
subject to a statutory, judicial, or administrative deadline.
Clarification, restructuring, and adding specificity will not change
the substance of the current requirements.
    EPA is also proposing to include a specific indication that these
requirements also pertain to unregistered export pesticide products and
devices shipped between registered establishments operated by the same
producer pursuant to 40 CFR 152.30(a). Section 152.30(a) states that an
unregistered pesticide product transferred between registered
establishments operated by the same producer must be labeled according
to 40 CFR part 156. However, there are additional label requirements at
Sec.  168.65 that also apply to a subset of the products covered by
Sec.  152.30(a), specifically, unregistered export pesticide products.
For example, part 156 does not require that the label indicate that the
pesticide product or device is not registered for use in the United
States, while Sec.  168.65 requires the statement ``Not Registered for
Use in the United States'' to appear on the label of any unregistered
export pesticide product or device. This statement may be further
amplified by adding the reason for the unregistered status. For
example:
    1. Not Registered for Use in the United States of America because
the product is exempt from registration;
    2. Not Registered for Use in the United States of America because
pesticide devices are not required to be registered;
    3. Not Registered for Use in the United States of America because
[insert crop name] is not grown in the United States.
    EPA believes that including the information required by Sec.
168.65 on the label while an export product moves within the United
States prior to its actual export further protects public health and
the environment by contributing to safer and more appropriate handling
and distribution of unregistered pesticide products and devices. EPA
also believes that unregistered pesticide products and devices intended
for export must be clearly marked with the labeling according to Sec.
168.65 to prevent them from inadvertently entering the U.S. market. EPA
requests comment on the amplifications of the phrase ``Not Registered
for Use in the United States.''

IV. Overview of Proposed Changes

A. Clarification and Restructuring of Current Regulations

    The clarifications and added specificity are consistent with
section 1(b)(12) of Executive Order 12866; this section requires each
agency to draft its regulations to be simple and easy to understand,
with the goal of minimizing the potential for uncertainty and
litigation arising from such uncertainty. Certainty can also contribute
to increased compliance with the requirements.

B. Definitions

    In order to clarify and distinguish between the labeling
requirements for pesticide products from the requirements for pesticide
devices, two definitions are proposed for 40 CFR part 168, subpart D:
Export pesticide product, and export pesticide device. Export pesticide
products include registered export pesticide products and unregistered
export pesticide products. The requirements for registered export
pesticide products, unregistered export pesticide products, and export
pesticide devices are presented in separate categories. This way the
producer and/or exporter can more easily determine the status of the
product and follow the specific directions for its category.

C. Labeling Export Shipments of Unregistered Pesticides and Devices
Between Establishments Operated by Same Producer

    EPA believes the minimal identity and safety information required
for export labeling in FIFRA section 17(a)(1) is important in ensuring
unregistered pesticide products and devices are properly identified
during transportation both within the United States and upon arrival in
the importing country. The current regulations in 40 CFR 152.30(a)
allow the transfer of unregistered pesticide products between
registered establishments operated by the same producer. The
notification of identity and safety measures of products intended for
export is not only important between the time the unregistered
pesticide product or device leaves a U.S. port and the time it arrives
in the importing country; this labeling is equally important while the
unregistered pesticide product or device is shipped between registered
establishments operated by the same producer within the United States.
    EPA intended that the labeling requirements in Sec.  168.65 be
followed for each unregistered export pesticide product as it makes its
way towards the importing country. However, the regulations promulgated
in 1993 inadvertently failed to explicitly state that the Sec.  168.65
labeling requirements applied to unregistered pesticide products and
devices intended for export as they move between registered
establishments operated by the same producer in the United States,
including transfers authorized by Sec.  152.30(a).
    If the producer exports an unregistered pesticide product or device
directly, then it is clear that the label that must accompany the
unregistered pesticide product or device when it leaves the production
facility must comply with Sec.  168.65.
    The requirement to label the unregistered pesticide product and
pesticide device as it begins to move between registered establishments
operated by the same producer may transfer the responsibility for the
label to the producer from the exporter/reformulator/repackager if the
latter was primarily responsible for the label before export.
    Therefore, EPA is proposing to explicitly require labeling as
prescribed by Sec.  168.65 to accompany the unregistered export
pesticide product or device at all times, even when they are being
shipped between registered establishments operated by the same
producer. Section 168.65 has been replaced by a proposed new numbering
of sections to accommodate the new categories of products and
accompanying regulations. EPA invites public comment on the requirement
for labeling unregistered pesticide products and devices being shipped
between establishments operated by the same producer.

V. Implementation

    This proposal addresses the future labeling of unregistered
pesticide products and devices shipped between establishments operated
by the same producer. The proposed labeling

requirements, once final, would apply to all pesticide products and
devices intended for export that are produced after the effective date
of the rule. The Agency believes that producers do not frequently
redesign the labels they use on unregistered pesticide products and
devices, so producers will have time to plan and implement any changes
to their current products or practices.
    Therefore, the Agency is proposing an effective date of 1 year
after the date of publication of the final rule. The Agency requests
comment on the proposed effective date.

VI. FIFRA Review Requirements

    In accordance with FIFRA section 25(a), EPA submitted a draft of
the proposed rule to the FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel (SAP), the
Secretary of Agriculture (USDA), and appropriate Congressional
Committees. The FIFRA SAP waived its review of this proposal on
December 8, 2010, because this proposal does not raise scientific
issues. USDA waived the opportunity to review the draft proposal on
November 29, 2010, because clarification and restructuring of the
current regulations are administrative actions with no scientific or
policy issues.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the terms of
Executive Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and Review (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993).
    EPA has determined that the cost is minimal to comply with the new
requirement that the unregistered pesticide product or device shipped
between registered establishments operated by the same producer be
labeled with the statement ``Not Registered for Use in the United
States.'' This determination was made given that labeling is already in
place under existing requirements and the burden of adding the
additional statement to unregistered products or devices shipped
between establishments would be negligible. EPA believes that this
labeling change may be easily accomplished using commonly available
word processing software; in addition, this label change does not
require label submission to or approval by EPA, and shall be phased in
as part of normal business operations. EPA concludes that the per firm
and industry level impact of the rule is not significant.

B. Information Collection Burdens

    This action does not impose any new information collection burden
that would require additional review or approval by OMB under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. OMB previously
approved the information collection requirements contained in the
existing regulations, 40 CFR 168.65, and has assigned OMB control
number 2070-0027 (EPA ICR No. 0161). Burden is defined at 5 CFR
1320.3(b). An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays
a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations in 40 CFR are displayed in the Federal Register and are
listed in 40 CFR part 9.

C. Small Entity Impacts

    Pursuant to section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA),
5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., the Agency hereby certifies that this action will
not have a significant adverse economic impact on a substantial number
of small entities.
    Under the RFA, small entities include small businesses, small
organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions. For purposes of
assessing the impacts of this proposed rule on small entities, small
entity is defined in accordance with section 601 of the RFA as:
    1. A small business as defined by the Small Business
Administration's (SBA) regulations at 13 CFR 121.201. A small business
that manufactures pesticides and other agricultural chemicals as
defined by NAICS code 325320, has 500 or fewer employees based on the
SBA standards.
    2. A small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a
city, county, town, school district or special district with a
population of less than 50,000.
    3. A small organization that is any not-for-profit enterprise which
is independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.
    The small entities directly regulated by this proposed rule are
small manufacturers of pesticides which export unregistered pesticide
products or devices.
    EPA has determined that the cost is minimal to comply with the new
requirements that the unregistered pesticide product or device be
labeled with ``Not Registered for Use in the United States.'' This is
because the labeling is already in place under existing requirements
and the burden of adding the additional statement to unregistered
pesticide products or devices shipped between establishments operated
by the same producer would be negligible. EPA believes this labeling
change may be easily accomplished using commonly available word
processing software; in addition, this label change does not require
label submission to or approval by EPA, and shall be phased in as part
of normal business operations. EPA concludes that the per firm and
industry level impact of the proposed rule is insignificant.
    Although this proposed rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities, EPA believes that
increasing the specificity of the current regulations will minimally
affect all manufacturers of export pesticide products and devices, not
just small entities. The more specific indication that ``Not Registered
for Use in the United States'' will be required while unregistered
pesticides products and devices are shipped between establishments
operated by the same manufacturer; this is the identical information
that is required before the unregistered pesticide product or device is
exported to another country.
    The Agency continues to be interested in the potential impacts of
the proposed rule on small entities and welcome comments on issues
related to such impacts.

D. Unfunded Mandates

    This rule does not contain a Federal mandate as described in the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA), 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, that may
result in expenditures of $100 million or more for State, local, and
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private sector in any one
year. This action is expected to only affect producers, transporters,
formulators, packagers, and exporters of unregistered pesticide
products and devices but not resulting in expenditures of $100 million
or more. Since no State, local, or tribal government is known to
produce, transport, formulate, package, or export unregistered
pesticide products or devices, this rule is not expected to affect
State, local, and tribal governments individually, much less in the
aggregate. Thus, this rule is not subject to the requirements of
sections 202 or 205 of UMRA.
    This rule is also not subject to the requirements of section 203 of
UMRA because it contains no regulatory requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Since no small
government is known to produce, transport, formulate, package, or
export unregistered pesticide products or devices, this rule is not

subject to the requirements of section 203 of UMRA.

E. Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications because it is not
expected to have substantial direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government, as specified in Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism
(64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action is expected to only affect
producers, transporters, formulators, packagers, and exporters of
unregistered pesticide products and devices. Since no State or local
government is known to produce, transport, formulate, package, or
export unregistered pesticide products or devices, there is no effect
on a State, the relationship between the national government and the
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not
apply to this action.
    In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with EPA
policy to promote communications between EPA and State and local
governments, EPA specifically solicits comment on this proposed action
from State and local officials.

F. Indian Tribal Implications

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175, entitled Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action
is expected to only affect producers, transporters, formulators,
packagers, and exporters of unregistered pesticide products and
devices. Since no Indian tribal government is known to produce,
transport, formulate, package, or export unregistered pesticide
products or devices, this action has no tribal implications. Thus,
Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.
    EPA specifically solicits additional comment on this proposed
action from tribal officials.

G. Children's Health Protection

    EPA interprets Executive Order 13045, entitled Protection of
Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997), as applying only to those regulatory actions that
concern health or safety risks, such that the analysis required under
section 5-501 of the Executive Order has the potential to influence the
regulation. This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because
it does not establish an environmental standard intended to mitigate
health or safety risks, nor is it an ``economically significant
regulatory action'' as defined in Executive Order 12866. The
clarification and restructuring of current regulations for the export
of unregistered pesticide products and devices do not present a
disproportionate risk to children. Requiring that such unregistered
pesticide products and devices shipped between establishments operated
by the same producer be labeled according to the current regulations in
Sec.  168.65 prevents them from inadvertently entering the U.S. market
and provides compliance assistance. This requirement further protects
public health and the environment by ensuring safe and appropriate
handling and distribution without presenting a disproportionate risk to
children.

H. Effect on Energy Supply, Distribution or Use

    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' as defined in
Executive Order 13211, entitled Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355,
May 22, 2001), because this action is not likely to have any effect on
the supply, distribution, or use of energy.

I. Technical Standards

    Because this action does not involve any technical standards,
section 12(d) of The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
of 1995 (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note), does not apply to this action.

J. Environmental Justice

    This action does not entail special considerations of environmental
justice related issues as delineated by Executive Order 12898, entitled
Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
EPA has determined that this proposed rule will not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because it increases the
level of environmental protection for all affected populations without
having any disproportionately high and adverse human health or
environmental effects on any population, including any minority or low-
income population. This rule is proposing to clarify, restructure, and
add specificity to the current regulations and thus add an extra margin
of safety for all affected populations as shipments of unregistered
pesticides and devices move between establishments operated by the same
producer. Labeling regulations at 40 CFR 152.30(a) currently require
that an unregistered pesticide transferred between establishments
operated by the same producer must follow labeling requirements in 40
CFR part 156. EPA believes that requiring the registration status
information from 40 CFR168.65 on the label further protects public
health and the environment by contributing to safer and more
appropriate handling and distribution of unregistered pesticide
products and devices. EPA believes that unregistered pesticide products
and devices intended for export must be clearly marked with the
labeling according to Sec.  168.65 to prevent them from inadvertently
entering the U.S. market.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 168

    Environmental protection, Exports, Labeling, Pesticides and pests.

    Dated: March 25, 2011.
Lisa P. Jackson,
Administrator.
    Therefore, it is proposed that 40 CFR chapter I be amended as
follows:

PART 168--STATEMENTS OF ENFORCEMENT POLICIES AND INTERPRETATION

    1. The authority citation for part 168 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority:  7 U.S.C. 136-136y.

Sec.  168.65  [Removed and Reserved].

    2. Remove and reserve Sec.  168.65.
    3. Add Sec. Sec.  168.66 through 168.71 to read as follows:
* * * * *
Sec.
168.66 Labeling of pesticide products and devices for export.
168.67 Definitions.
168.68 Applicability.
168.69 Registered export pesticide products.
168.70 Unregistered export pesticide products.
168.71 Export pesticide devices.
* * * * *

Sec.  168.66  Labeling of pesticide products and devices for export.

    (a) This subpart describes the labeling requirements applicable to
pesticide products and devices that are intended solely for export from
the United States under the provisions of FIFRA sec. 17(a). The
requirements for pesticide production reporting, recordkeeping and
inspection and purchaser

acknowledgement provisions can be found in the following parts:
    (1) Pesticide production reporting requirements under FIFRA sec. 7
are located in part 167 of this chapter (or Sec.  168.85(b));
    (2) Recordkeeping and inspection requirements under FIFRA sec. 8
are located in part 169 of this chapter (or Sec.  168.85(a));
    (3) Purchaser acknowledgement statement provisions under FIFRA sec.
17(a) are located in Sec.  168.75.
    (b) The required label information may be fully met by:
    (1) The product label attached to the immediate product;
    (2) The product label and supplemental labeling; or
    (3) Supplemental labeling that must be:
    (i) Attached at all times during shipping or while being held for
shipping; or
    (ii) Attached to the immediate product container or to the shipping
container.

Sec.  168.67  Definitions.

    Terms used in this subpart have the same meaning as in the Act. The
definitions of terms in Sec.  152.3 of this chapter apply to this
subpart unless defined in this section,
    Export pesticide device means a device, as defined in FIFRA sec.
2(h), that is intended solely for export from the United States to
another country.
    Export pesticide product means a pesticide product, as defined in
Sec.  152.3 of this chapter, that is intended solely for export from
the United States to another country.

Sec.  168.68  Applicability.

    This subpart applies to all export pesticide products and export
pesticide devices regardless of the purpose of the export.

Sec.  168.69  Registered export pesticide products.

    (a) Each export pesticide product that is registered under FIFRA
sec. 3 or FIFRA sec. 24(c) must bear a label or be accompanied by
labeling approved by EPA for its registration.
    (b) For the purposes of this subpart, a registered export pesticide
product is considered to be any of the following:
    (1) A pesticide product of composition, packaging and labeling as
described in its registration under FIFRA sec. 3;
    (2) A pesticide product that has been modified in compliance with
the notification or non-notification provisions of Sec.  152.46 of this
chapter, and any associated procedures issued under Sec.  156.10(e) of
this chapter, regardless of whether such modification has been made for
the pesticide product's registration under FIFRA sec. 3;
    (3) A pesticide product initially registered by a State under FIFRA
sec. 24(c), and whose Federal registration has not been disapproved by
EPA under Sec.  162.164 of this chapter.
    (c) The text of the label or supplemental labeling of the
registered pesticide product must be provided in one of the following
languages besides English:
    (1) The language of the country of final destination, if known;
    (2) The language predominantly used in the importing country; or
    (3) The language in which official government business is conducted
in the importing country.

Sec.  168.70  Unregistered export pesticide products.

    (a) Any export pesticide product that does not meet the terms of
Sec.  168.69 is an unregistered export pesticide for purposes of this
subpart.
    (b) Each unregistered export pesticide product must bear a label or
be accompanied by supplemental labeling that complies with all
requirements of this section and Sec.  168.66(b).
    (1) The label or supplemental labeling must comply with all of the
prominence and legibility requirements of Sec.  156.10(a)(2) of this
chapter.
    (2) The label or supplemental labeling must comply with all the
language requirements in Sec.  168.69(c) and Sec.  156.10(a)(3) of this
chapter.
    (3) The label or supplemental labeling must bear the following
information:
    (i) The name and address of the producer, in accordance with the
requirements of Sec.  156.10(c) of this chapter;
    (ii) The net weight or measure of contents, in accordance with the
requirements of Sec.  156.10(d) of this chapter;
    (iii) The pesticide producing establishment number, in accordance
with the requirements of Sec.  156.10(f) of this chapter;
    (iv) An ingredients statement, in accordance with the requirements
of Sec.  156.10(g) of this chapter, except that:
    (A) The ingredients statement need not appear in a second language
besides English if the English language version is likely to be
understood by the ordinary individual in the importing country; and
    (B) An export pesticide product intended solely for research and
development purposes, (and which bears the statement ``For research and
development purposes only. Not for distribution, sale or use,'' or
similar language) may bear coded ingredient information to protect
confidentiality.
    (v) Human health and precautionary statements in accordance with
the requirements of subpart D of part 156 of this chapter. If a
translated U.S. precautionary statement is inappropriate in the
importing country, an equivalent statement appropriate to the importing
country must be substituted;
    (vi) The statement ``Not Registered for Use in the United States of
America,'' which may be amplified by additional statements describing
the reason(s) why the export pesticide product is not registered in the
United States, or is not registered for particular uses.
    (c) This section also applies to all unregistered pesticide
products and devices that are transferred, distributed, or sold between
registered establishments operated by the same producer under the
exemptions provided by Sec.  152.30(a) of this chapter if:
    (1) The transfer, distribution or sale occurs between a point in
the United States and a point outside the United States, or
    (2) The transfer occurs within the United States solely for the
purpose of export from the United States.

Sec.  168.71  Export pesticide devices.

    (a) Each export pesticide device sold or distributed anywhere in
the United States must bear a label or be accompanied by supplemental
labeling that complies with all requirements of this section and Sec.
168.66(b).
    (b) The label or supplemental labeling of each export pesticide
device must meet all of the prominence and legibility requirements of
Sec.  156.10(a)(2) of this chapter.
    (c) The label or supplemental labeling must also comply with all
the language requirements in Sec.  168.69(c) and Sec.  156.10(a)(3) of
this chapter.
    (d) The label or supplemental labeling must bear the following
information:
    (1) The name and address of the producer, meeting the requirements
of Sec.  156.10(c) of this chapter;
    (2) The producing establishment number, meeting the requirements of
Sec.  156.10(f) of this chapter;
    (3) The statement ``Not Registered for Use in the United States of
America,'' which may be amplified by additional statements describing
the reason why the export pesticide device is not registered in the
United States.

    (e) An export pesticide device is not required to bear an
ingredients statement.

[FR Doc. 2011-7900 Filed 4-5-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P