[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 51 (Thursday, March 15, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 15336-15343]
[FR Doc No: 2012-6276]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

4O CFR Parts 260 and 261

[EPA-HQ-RCRA-2011-1014, FRL-9646-4]
RIN 2050-AG68

Revision to the Export Provisions of the Cathode Ray Tube (CRT)
Rule

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency) is
proposing to revise certain export provisions of the cathode ray tube
(CRT) final rule published on July 28, 2006 (71 FR 42928). The proposed
revisions will allow the Agency to better track exports of CRTs for
reuse and recycling. Additionally, EPA would gather more information on
shipments of CRTs that are sent for reuse.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 14, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
RCRA-2011-1014 by one of the following methods:
    www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
    Email: Comments may be sent by electronic mail (email) to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-RCRA-2011-1014.
    Fax: Fax comments to:<PHONE_NUMBER>, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
RCRA-2011-1014.
    Mail: Send comments to: OSWER Docket, EPA Docket Center, Mail Code
5305T, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20460, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-RCRA-2011-1014.
Please include two copies of your comments. In addition, please mail a
copy of your comments on the information collection provisions to the
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and
Budget (OMB), Attn: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th St., Washington, DC
20503.
    Hand delivery: Deliver two copies of your comments to:
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-
HQ-RCRA-2011-1014. Such deliveries are only accepted during the
docket's normal hours of operation and special arrangements should be
made for deliveries of boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-RCRA-
2011-1014. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
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 www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment
directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, such as CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
at www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the OSWER Docket, EPA/DC, EPA
West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading
Room is<PHONE_NUMBER> and the telephone number for the OSWER Docket is
(202) 566-0270.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For more detailed information on
specific aspects of this rulemaking, contact Marilyn Goode, Office of
Resource Conservation and Recovery, Materials Recovery and Waste
Management Division, MC 5304P, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
(goode.marilyn@epa.gov).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Does this action apply to me?

    Entities potentially affected by today's action include all persons
who export used cathode ray tubes (CRTs) and CRT glass for reuse or
recycling. This action does not affect households or conditionally
exempt small quantity generators (CESQGs). Annual costs to CRT
exporters and EPA for the reporting and recordkeeping requirements
range from $7,300 to $11,500 per year.
    More detailed information on the potentially affected entities,
industries, and industrial materials, as well as the economic impacts
of this proposed rule, is presented in Section VIII of this preamble
and in the Regulatory Impact Analysis available in the docket for this
proposal.

What To Consider When Preparing Comments for EPA

    Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark all 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.
    Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
     Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other
identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and
page number).
     Follow directions. The Agency may ask for commenters to
respond to specific questions or organize comments by referencing a
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
     Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives
and substitute language for your requested changes.

     Describe any assumptions and provide any technical
information and/or data that you used.
     If estimating burden or costs, explain methods used to
arrive at the estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
     Provide specific examples to illustrate any concerns and
suggest alternatives.
     Make sure to submit comments by the comment period
deadline identified above.

Preamble Outline

I. Statutory Authority
II. List of Abbreviations and Acronyms
III. What is the intent of this proposal?
IV. What is the scope of this proposal?
V. Background
VI. Proposed Changes to the CRT Rule
VII. State Authorization
VIII. Administrative Requirements for This Rulemaking

I. Statutory Authority

    These regulations are proposed under the authority of sections
2002(a), 3001, 3002, 3004, and 3006 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act of
1970, as amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976
(RCRA), as amended by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984
(HSWA), 42 U.S.C. 3007, 6912(a), 6921, 6922, 6924, 6926, 6927, and
6938.

II. List of Abbreviations and Acronyms

CRT--Cathode Ray Tube
CFR--Code of Federal Regulations
EPA--Environmental Protection Agency
RCRA--Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
RIA--Regulatory Impact Analysis

III. What is the intent of this proposal?

    Today's proposal would revise the conditional exclusions from the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) regulations that apply to
persons who export cathode ray tubes (CRTs) for reuse or recycling. The
existing requirements were first promulgated on July 28, 2006 (71 FR
42928). Since promulgation of these requirements, the Agency has
realized the necessity of obtaining additional information on the
export of this class of used electronics to better ensure their proper
management. This notice is intended to propose changes to accomplish
that goal.

IV. What is the scope of this proposal?

    Today's proposal would affect only the export provisions of the CRT
rule, and would not affect any requirements applicable to the domestic
management of used CRTs. In this notice, EPA is proposing to add a
definition of ``CRT exporter'' to the CRT rule. This proposed
definition is consistent with the intent of the original CRT rule,
which was to ensure that EPA received proper notification of all
shipments of CRTs exported for reuse or recycling. We are also
proposing to revise the notifications that must be submitted to EPA
when CRTs are exported for reuse or recycling, and to require annual
reports from exporters of CRTs for recycling. These proposed changes
are described in section VI of this preamble. EPA is seeking comment
only on the changes proposed today, and is not reopening any other part
of the rule for comment.

V. Background

    The Agency promulgated the CRT rule on July 28, 2006 (71 FR 42928).
In that rule, EPA amended its regulations under RCRA to streamline the
management requirements for used CRTs in an effort to encourage
recycling and reuse of these materials rather than landfilling or
possible incineration. The scope of the rule encompassed both used,
intact CRTs and used, broken CRTs (i.e., glass that has been removed
from its housing or casing with its vacuum released). Specifically,
under 40 CFR 261.39, these materials are excluded from the definition
of solid waste if certain conditions are met, including: (1) Used CRTs
(intact or broken) sent for reuse and recycling are subject to the
speculative accumulation requirements of 40 CFR 261.1(c)(8); (2) used,
broken CRTs and CRT glass processors are subject to packaging and
labeling requirements; and (3) CRT glass processors may not use
temperatures high enough to volatilize lead. Persons who send CRTs for
disposal are not eligible for the exclusion at 40 CFR 261.39, and may
be required to handle their CRTs as hazardous waste from the point of
generation, including the requirement to file a hazardous waste export
notice under 40 CFR part 262 and the requirement to send the CRTs to a
Subtitle C landfill.
    In addition to these domestic requirements, the CRT rule also
contains requirements at 40 CFR 261.39(a)(5) for used CRTs (intact or
broken) exported for recycling. In order for these CRTs to be excluded
from the definition of solid waste, the exporter must meet certain
conditions. In particular, exporters of used CRTs for recycling must
notify EPA of an intended shipment 60 days before the shipment occurs.
Notifications may cover exports extending over a 12-month or shorter
period. The notification must include contact information about the
exporter, the recycler, and an alternate recycler, as well as a
description of the manner in which the CRTs will be recycled, frequency
and rate of export, means of transport, total quantity of CRTs to be
shipped, and information about which transit countries the shipments
will pass through.
    When EPA receives this information, it notifies the receiving
country and any transit countries. When the receiving country consents
in writing to receive the CRTs, EPA forwards an Acknowledgement of
Consent (AOC) to the exporter. The exporter may not ship the CRTs until
he receives the AOC. If the receiving country does not consent or
withdraws a prior consent, EPA will notify the exporter in writing, and
the exporter may not allow any shipments or further shipments to
proceed. Exporters must keep copies of notifications and AOCs for three
years following receipt of the consent. Consent is not required from
transit countries, but EPA notifies the exporter of any responses from
these countries. Under 40 CFR 261.39(c), processed glass (i.e., glass
that has been sorted or otherwise managed pursuant to the definition of
``CRT processing'' in 40 CFR 260.10) is subject only to the speculative
accumulation requirements and exporters of such materials are not
subject to the export notice requirements of 40 CFR 261.39(a)(5).
    With respect to used intact CRTs that are exported for reuse, 40
CFR 261.41 requires exporters to submit a one-time notification to EPA
with contact information and a statement that they are exporting the
CRTs for reuse. They must keep copies of normal business records
demonstrating that each shipment will be reused. Records must be
retained for three years from the date of export. Examples of normal
business records include contracts, invoices, shipping documents, and
other documents that identify the planned disposition of the materials.
    Since promulgation of the CRT rule in 2006, exports of CRTs,
whether for reuse or recycling, have continued. As EPA implemented the
rule, it became apparent that additional information is needed from the
CRT exporter to better understand the flow of exported CRTs in order to
ensure better management of these materials. To address this issue, EPA
is today proposing certain changes to the CRT rule, which are explained
in section VI below.

VI. Proposed Changes to the CRT Rule

A. Definition of ``CRT Exporter''

    In the preamble to the final CRT rule, the Agency stated that
``persons taking

advantage of the exclusion that fail to meet one or more of its
conditions may be subject to enforcement action and the CRTs may be
considered to be hazardous waste from the point of their generation.
EPA could choose to bring an enforcement action under RCRA Section
3008(a) for all violations of the hazardous waste requirements
occurring from the time a decision was made to recycle or dispose of
the CRTs, through the time they are finally disposed of or reclaimed.
EPA believes that this approach, which treats CRTs exhibiting a
hazardous waste characteristic that do not conform to the conditions of
the exclusion as hazardous waste from their point of generation,
provides all handlers with an incentive to handle the CRTs consistent
with the conditions. It also encourages each person to take appropriate
steps to ensure that CRTs are safely handled and legitimately reused or
recycled by others in the management chain'' (71 FR 42928 at 42943).
    When used CRTs are exported for recycling or reuse, there may be
several persons involved from the time that a decision is made to
export these materials up to the time that the actual export occurs.
The trade in used electronics can take place along a chain of
businesses that collect, refurbish, dismantle, recycle, and reprocess
used electronic products and their components. For example, a state
(e.g., Texas or Wisconsin) may contract with recycling facilities to
collect and recycle used electronics, including used CRTs. The
recycling facilities may separate out equipment that can be reused,
while unusable equipment is disassembled, sorted, and shredded. The
reusable equipment may be sold or donated domestically or exported,
sometimes through a broker. If recycling occurs, various component
parts may be sent to subcontractors for further processing and returned
to the manufacturing stream. Some of the processing (e.g., circuit
boards, plastics) is performed abroad. For example, CRT glass may be
cleaned and sorted in Mexico and then sent to India where it is made
back into new CRTs.
    If an exporter of used CRTs for recycling did not fulfill the
export notice provisions of the CRT rule by notifying EPA, the
receiving country would not receive notice that these materials were
entering the country, and would be unable to provide consent.
Similarly, if an exporter of used, intact CRTs filed a one-time reuse
notice, but the CRTs were not functional and were subsequently recycled
or even disposed, then EPA might rely on this mischaracterization
without giving the receiving country the opportunity to consent to the
shipments. In both of these situations, the competent authorities in
the receiving countries would find it difficult to determine whether
the imported CRTs were properly managed. Under the current EPA
interpretation, intermediaries who participated in arranging for the
CRT exports, as well as the actual entities that sent the CRT exports,
may be liable under RCRA for exporting hazardous waste in violation of
hazardous waste export requirements if they fail to fulfill the notice
requirements, among other conditions, of the CRT rule.
    To eliminate any potential confusion over who is responsible for
fulfilling CRT exporter duties, including submitting the export notices
required under 40 CFR 261.39(a)(5) (for CRTs exported for recycling)
and 40 CFR 261.41 (for CRTs exported for reuse), the Agency is today
proposing to add a definition of ``CRT exporter'' to 40 CFR 260.10. The
proposed definition states that a CRT exporter is ``any person in the
United States who initiates a transaction to send used CRTs outside the
United States or its territories for recycling or reuse, or any
intermediary in the United States arranging for such export.'' The
reference to ``any intermediary'' is modeled on the definition of
``primary exporter'' of hazardous waste in 40 CFR 260.10. As described
above, there may be multiple parties who participate in deciding
whether CRTs will be exported for recycling or reuse, and in arranging
for the export of these materials. To avoid duplicative submissions,
the Agency expects only one person to perform the exporter duties under
40 CFR 261.39(a)(5) and 40 CFR 261.41 (notifications to EPA,
recordkeeping, and the annual reports that are proposed today and
described below in this section of the preamble). However, all persons
are jointly and severally liable for failing to comply with the
exporter requirements. In other words, EPA has the authority to enforce
the CRT rule export regulations against all persons associated with the
export who meet the definition of ``CRT exporter.'' To avoid
duplicative submittals, all relevant persons should assign these
exporter responsibilities among themselves. This procedure is similar
to the situation where several parties meet the RCRA definition of
``generator'' (see 45 FR 72024, 72026, October 30, 1980).
    We are also proposing that the CRT exporter and any intermediary
arranging for the export must be in the United States, because foreign-
based entities add to the possibility of confusion over fulfilling the
export responsibilities, and it is more difficult to establish EPA
jurisdiction over such persons.
    EPA emphasizes that this proposed definition is consistent with the
intent of the CRT rule. The Agency requests comment on any alternative
regulatory changes which might better accomplish that intent.

B. Proposed Changes to the Notification Required for Used CRTs Sent for
Recycling

    The conditional exclusion in 40 CFR 261.39(a)(5) require exporters
to submit a notice to EPA when exporting used CRTs for recycling. EPA
then forwards the notice to the receiving country to obtain the consent
of that country. The notice submitted to EPA must contain, among other
items of information, the estimated frequency or rate at which the CRTs
are to be exported and the period of time over which they are to be
exported. The notice must also contain the estimated total quantity of
CRTs (specified in kilograms) that the exporter expects to ship during
the following 12 months or lesser period. However, there is currently
no requirement to subsequently report the quantity of CRTs that were
actually exported during the time period specified in the notice.
Without this information, the Agency is unable to determine the actual
quantity of CRTs that are exported in a given year, either by a
particular exporter or in total. The notification requirements for
exporters of hazardous waste under 40 CFR part 262 subparts E and H,
for exporters of spent lead-acid batteries under 40 CFR 266.80(a)(6),
and for exporters of universal waste under 40 CFR 273.20 or 273.40 all
include a requirement to submit annual reports documenting the actual
quantities of such materials that were exported. By reviewing annual
reports, EPA can compare the amount of material that was actually
exported to the estimates that were submitted earlier by these
exporters when they provided the initial notification sent to the
receiving country.
    Today the Agency is proposing to add a requirement (40 CFR
261.39(a)(5)(x)) to require annual reports from exporters of used CRTs
sent for recycling. In general, these reports would provide EPA with
more accurate information on the total quantity of CRTs exported for
recycling during the calendar year, and would also help determine
whether CRTs exported for recycling are handled as commodities and not
discarded. Additionally, EPA would be able to analyze shipments from
specific exporters by comparing actual shipments in the annual report
against proposed shipments in the export notice

to ensure that the shipments occurred under the terms approved by the
receiving country. Finally, these reports would enable EPA to provide
receiving countries with information that may assist them in
determining the quantity of CRTs that were received in a particular
country for recycling.
    Under today's proposal, the exporter must provide, no later than
March 1 of each year, a report summarizing the quantities (in
kilograms), frequency of shipment, and ultimate destination(s) (i.e.,
the facility or facilities where the recycling occurs) of all CRTs
exported for recycling during the previous calendar year. Such reports
must also include the name, EPA ID number (if applicable), mailing and
site address of the CRT exporter, the calendar year covered by the
report, and a certification signed by the exporter which states: ``I
certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am
familiar with the information submitted in this and all attached
documents, and that based on my inquiry of those individuals
immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I believe that
the submitted information is true, accurate, and complete. I am aware
that there are significant penalties for submitting false information,
including the possibility of fine and imprisonment.'' Under today's
proposal, the annual reports would be submitted to the same EPA office
to which the original notices were sent. Exporters would be required to
keep copies of annual reports for a period of at least three years from
the due date of the report.
    The Agency solicits comment on whether requiring such a report is
sufficient to determine the actual quantity of CRTs that are exported
in a given year. We also request comment on whether additional
information is needed to accomplish this goal, and on whether the goal
could be accomplished with less information, or in some other manner
than an annual report.
    EPA is today proposing one other change to the notice required for
CRTs exported for recycling. The current notice (40 CFR
261.39(a)(5)(i)(F)) requires the exporter to state the name and address
of the recycler and any alternate recycler. Because CRTs are sometimes
exported to more than one recycler in the receiving country, we are
proposing to replace this language with a requirement that the exporter
state the name and address of the recycler or recyclers and the
estimated quantity of CRTs to be sent to each facility, as well as the
names of any alternate recyclers. In this way, EPA will be able to
provide the receiving country with the most accurate information
available about the ultimate fate of the CRTs when they reach that
country.

C. Proposed Changes to the Notification Required for Used, Intact CRTs
Exported for Reuse

    Currently, exporters who send used CRTs for reuse must submit a
one-time notice with certain information under 40 CFR 261.41. The
notice must be sent to the Regional Administrator. (The regulatory
language does not specify which Regional Administrator, but it was the
Agency's intent that the notice be sent to the Region from which the
export takes place.) The notice must include a statement that the
notifier plans to export used, intact CRTs for reuse. The notice must
also include the notifier's name, address, and EPA ID number (if
applicable), and the name and phone number of a contact person. Persons
who export used, intact CRTs for reuse must keep copies of normal
business records, such as contracts, demonstrating that each shipment
of exported CRTs will be reused. This documentation must be retained
for a period of at least three years from the date the CRTs were
exported.
    Since promulgation of this requirement, the Agency has become aware
that some CRTs allegedly exported for reuse are actually recycled in
the receiving country, sometimes under unsafe conditions. Failure to
file the notice required for CRTs sent for recycling deprives the
Agency of its ability to notify the receiving country about the CRTs to
be imported into that country and obtain its consent. In order to
require exporters to submit more complete information about the
purported reuse of the exported CRTs over a specific period of time, we
are proposing to add items to the reuse notice at 40 CFR 261.41 that
are modeled on those required in the notice for CRTs exported for
recycling. In addition, today's proposal would replace the one-time
notice provision with a requirement that the notice be submitted
periodically, to cover exports for reuse expected over a twelve month
or lesser period. EPA believes that this additional information in the
notice for reuse would greatly improve tracking, and thus better
management, of these CRTS that are claimed to be exported for reuse.
    Thus, under today's proposal, CRT exporters who export used, intact
CRTs for reuse would be required to send a notification to EPA that
would cover export activities extending over a twelve (12) month or
lesser period. This notice would be sent to the same EPA office that
receives notices for CRTs exported for recycling (the Office of
Enforcement and Compliance Assurance). The notification would be in
writing, signed by the exporter, and would have to contain:
     The name, mailing address, telephone number and EPA ID
number (if applicable) of the exporter of the CRTs;
     The estimated frequency or rate at which the CRTs would be
exported and the period of time over which they would be exported;
     The estimated total quantity of CRTs specified in
kilograms;
     All points of entry to and departure from each transit
country through which the CRTs would pass;
     A description of the approximate length of time the CRTs
would remain in each country and the nature of their handling while
there;
     A description of the means by which each shipment of the
CRTs would be transported (e.g., mode of transportation vehicle, such
as air, highway, rail, water, etc.), as well as the type(s) of
container (drums, boxes, tanks, etc.);
     The name and address of the ultimate destination facility
or facilities where the CRTs will be reused and the estimated quantity
of CRTs to be sent to each facility, as well as the name of any
alternate destination facility;
     A description of the manner in which the CRTs will be
reused in the country that will be receiving the CRTs; and
     A certification signed by the exporter which states: ``I
certify under penalty of law that the CRTs described in this notice are
fully functioning or capable of being functional after refurbishment. I
certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am
familiar with the information submitted in this and all attached
documents, and that based on my inquiry of those individuals
immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I believe that
the submitted information is true, accurate, and complete. I am aware
that there are significant penalties for submitting false information
including the possibility of fine and imprisonment.
    Because of the additional items proposed for the reuse notice, the
Agency believes it is appropriate to extend the coverage of this notice
to a specified period of time, i.e., a twelve-month or lesser period.
This time period is preferable to the one-time notice previously
required because it ensures that the necessary information in the
notice is more accurate and current.
    The Agency solicits comment on whether the proposed notice could

effectively contain fewer items of information, or whether the goal
could be accomplished in some other manner. In addition, the Agency
requests comment on whether the proposed notice should be sent to the
Regional Administrator (as is the case with 40 CFR 261.41) or to EPA
Headquarters, where notices for CRTs exported for recycling are
currently sent. The Agency believes that sending both types of notices
to EPA Headquarters would facilitate retention and effective tracking
of such notices, and will also be easier for those exporters who are
required to submit notices for both reuse and recycling. However, we
solicit comment on whether there are benefits in sending these notices
to the EPA Regions.
    The Agency also solicits comment on whether to require exporters of
CRTs for reuse to accompany all shipments of such CRTs with copies of
the notice submitted pursuant to 40 CFR 261.41. If such a requirement
were finalized, the Agency would require such exporters to submit a
complete notification to EPA before the initial shipment is intended to
be shipped off-site (e.g., 60 days before the planned shipment), so
that the exporter would have time to submit a copy of the completed
notice with the shipment. In this way, if officials of U.S. Customs
examined a shipment of used CRTs exported for reuse, they would be able
to quickly obtain more information from the exporter or from EPA, if
necessary. The Agency solicits comment on the benefits of such a
requirement and whether such benefits would outweigh the costs to the
exporter.
    The Agency notes that 40 CFR 261.41(b) requires persons who export
CRTs for reuse to keep copies of normal business records, such as
contracts, demonstrating that each shipment of exported CRTs will be
reused. The documentation must be retained for a period of at least
three years from the date the CRTs were exported. EPA solicits comment
on whether to require specific types of documents to be retained, such
as contracts, invoices, and/or shipping documents, and, if so, which
documents must be retained. We also solicit comment on whether to
require persons who export CRTs for reuse to provide a third-party
translation of the documents into English if the documents are written
in a language other than English and if EPA requests such a
translation. In addition, we request comment on whether to require
persons who export CRTs for reuse to provide contact information on an
alternative destination facility for used, intact CRTs that are damaged
in transit, or whether to require such persons to send the damaged CRTs
back to the CRT exporter
    Finally, the Agency also solicits comment on whether to add a
requirement to submit annual reports for exporters of used, intact CRTs
for reuse. These reports could be identical to the reports proposed for
CRTs exported for recycling. They would enable EPA to learn the actual
number of CRTs exported for reuse, which may be different from the
number estimated in the original notice required under 40 CFR 261.41.
EPA requests comment on whether this information would provide benefits
which might outweigh the costs of submitting the report.

D. Other Issues

1. ``Bare'' CRTs
    The current definition of ``used, intact CRT'' in 40 CFR 260.10
means a CRT whose vacuum has not been released. As we stated in the
preamble to the 2006 final rule (71 FR 42942), this definition would
encompass intact CRTs that are removed from the monitor with the vacuum
still intact, even though the plastic housing or casing has been broken
and removed. In that preamble, EPA stated that these materials
resembled products more than wastes, and therefore should not be
considered solid wastes unless disposed. If such ``bare'' CRTs are
exported for reuse (i.e., placement into CRT monitors), they would not
be subject to the export requirements of 40 CFR 261.39(a)(5), but would
instead be subject to the reuse requirements of proposed 40 CFR 261.41.
However, if exported for recycling, (presumably for glass or lead
recovery), they would not be eligible for the exclusion in 40 CFR
261.39(c) for processed glass sent to a lead smelter or glass
manufacturer because the CRTs have not been processed pursuant to the
definition of ``CRT processing'' in 40 CFR 260.10. EPA solicits comment
on whether ``bare'' CRTs removed from the monitor whose vacuum has not
been released are likely to be exported for recycling rather than reuse
and whether the regulation needs to be modified to reflect this
situation.

VII. State Authorization

A. Applicability of Rules in Authorized States

    Under section 3006 of RCRA, EPA may authorize a qualified state to
administer and enforce a hazardous waste program within the state in
lieu of the Federal program, and to issue and enforce permits in the
state. A state may receive authorization by following the approval
process described in 40 CFR 271.21 (see 40 CFR part 271 for the overall
standards and requirements for authorization). EPA continues to have
independent authority to bring enforcement actions under RCRA sections
3007, 3008, 3013, and 7003. An authorized state also continues to have
independent authority to bring enforcement actions under state law.
    After a state receives initial authorization, new Federal
requirements promulgated under RCRA authority existing prior to the
1984 Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) do not apply in that
state until the state adopts and receives authorization for equivalent
state requirements. In contrast, under RCRA section 3006(g) (42 U.S.C.
6926(g)), new Federal requirements and prohibitions promulgated
pursuant to the HSWA provisions take effect in authorized states at the
same time that they take effect in unauthorized states. As such, EPA
carries out HSWA requirements and prohibitions in authorized states,
including the issuance of new permits implementing those requirements,
until EPA authorizes the state to do so.
    Authorized states are required to modify their programs only when
EPA enacts Federal requirements that are more stringent or broader in
scope than the existing Federal requirements.\1\ RCRA section 3009
allows the states to impose standards more stringent than those in the
Federal program (see also 40 FR 271.1(i)). Therefore, authorized states
are not required to adopt Federal regulations, both HSWA and non-HSWA,
that are considered less stringent than previous Federal regulations or
that narrow the scope of the RCRA program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ EPA notes that decisions regarding whether a state rule is
more stringent or broader in scope than the Federal program are made
when the Agency authorizes state programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Effect on State Authorization

    Because of the Federal Government's special role in matters of
foreign policy, EPA does not authorize States to administer Federal
import/export functions in any section of the RCRA hazardous waste
regulations. This promotes national coordination, uniformity and the
expeditious transmission of information between the United States and
foreign countries. Although States would not receive authorization to
administer the Federal Government's export functions in this proposal,
State programs would still be required to adopt those provisions in
today's rule that are more stringent than existing Federal requirements
to

maintain their equivalency with the Federal program. Today's proposal
contains amendments to 40 CFR 261.39 and 40 CFR 261.41 which would be
more stringent if finalized. Therefore, states that have adopted these
provisions, as well as states that have added CRTs to their universal
waste programs under 40 CFR part 273, would be required to adopt these
amendments. In addition, EPA strongly encourages States to incorporate
all the import and export related requirements into their regulations
for the convenience of the regulated community and for completeness,
particularly where a State has already incorporated 40 CFR part 262,
subparts E and H, the import/export manifest and OECD movement document
related requirements in Sec.  263.10(d), the import manifest and OECD
movement document submittal requirements in Sec. Sec.  264.12(a)(2),
264.71, 265.12(a)(2), and 265.71, or the management provisions for
spent lead-acid batteries (SLABs) in 40 CFR part 266, subpart G. When a
State adopts the export provisions in this rule, care should be taken
not to replace Federal or international references with State terms.

VIII. Administrative Requirements for This Rulemaking

A. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563: Regulatory Planning and Review

    This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and is
therefore not subject to review under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
(76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011). EPA prepared an analysis of the
potential costs and benefits associated with this action. This analysis
is contained in the Economic Impacts Assessment for Proposed Revisions
to the Export Provisions of the Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Rule. A copy of
the analysis is available in the docket for this action. Annual costs
to CRT exporters and EPA for the reporting and recordkeeping
requirements range from $7,300 to $11,500 per year.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (Information Collection Request)

    The information collection requirements in this proposed rule have
been submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. An
Information Collection Request (ICR) document prepared by EPA has been
assigned EPA ICR number 2455.01.
    EPA, under existing 40 CFR 261.39(a)(5)(F) and 40 CFR 261.41, is
proposing to revise the notifications that must be submitted to EPA
when CRTs are exported for reuse or recycling. EPA, under new
261.39(a)(5)(x), is also proposing to add a requirement that exporters
of CRTs for recycling must submit an annual report to EPA. The purpose
of these proposed revisions is to address certain implementation
concerns with the current export provisions of the CRT rule. The
current notice for CRTs exported for recycling requires the exporter to
state the name and address of the recycler and any alternate recycler.
Because CRTs are sometimes exported to more than one recycler in the
receiving country, EPA is proposing to require that the exporter state
the name and address of the recycler or recyclers and the estimated
quantity of CRTs to be sent to each facility, as well as the names of
any alternate recyclers.
    EPA is proposing to expand the current reuse notice and model the
notice on that required for CRTs exported for recycling. Instead of a
one-time notice, EPA is proposing to require that reuse notices be
submitted to cover a twelve month or shorter period. EPA is also
proposing to add additional items of information to the notice,
including contact information about the exporter and the destination
facility, the frequency or rate at which the CRTs would be exported,
the quantity of CRTs, transport information, and a description of the
manner in which the CRTs will be reused in the receiving country.
Furthermore, EPA is proposing to require that the exporter sign a
certification that the CRTs are fully functioning or capable of being
functional after refurbishment. EPA believes that the proposed expanded
notice will help the Agency determine whether the exported CRTs have
been handled as products that are actually reused in the receiving
country.
    Finally, EPA is proposing to add a requirement that exporters of
CRTs for recycling submit an annual report documenting the actual
numbers of CRTs exported during the previous calendar year. This number
may differ from the estimate submitted in the original notice. This
information will help ensure that the shipments occurred under the
terms approved by the receiving country, and would enable EPA to
provide receiving countries with information that may help them to
determine the quantity of CRTs that were received in a particular
country for recycling.
    EPA has carefully considered the burden imposed upon the regulated
community by the proposed information collection requirements. EPA is
confident that those activities required of respondents are necessary
and, to the extent possible, has attempted to minimize the burden
imposed. EPA believes strongly that if the minimum information
collection requirements specified under the proposed rule are not met,
neither the facilities nor EPA can ensure that CRTs are managed in
compliance with the regulations.
    EPA estimates that the total annual respondent burden for the new
paperwork requirements in the rule ranges from 229 to 259 hours, and
the annual respondent cost for the new paperwork requirements is
approximately $17,600 to $19,700. The estimated annual hourly burden
ranges from 0.15 to 3.5 hours per response for the 138 respondents. The
estimated total annual burden to EPA for administering the rule (e.g.,
receive, review, and process information required under the proposed
rule) ranges from 55 to 97 hours, with a cost of approximately $2700 to
$4700. 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 are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
    To comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy
of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for
minimizing respondent burden, EPA has established a public docket for
this rule, which includes this ICR, under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-RCRA-
2011-1014. Submit any comments related to the ICR for this proposed
rule to EPA and OMB. See ADDRESSES section at the beginning of this
notice for where to submit comments to EPA. Send comments to OMB at the
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and
Budget, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk
Officer for EPA. Since OMB is required to make a decision concerning
the ICR between 30 and 60 days after March 15, 2012, a comment to OMB
is best assured of having its full effect if OMB receives it by April
16, 2012. The final rule will respond to any OMB or public comments on
the information collection requirements contained in this proposal.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment

rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any
other statute unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Small entities include small businesses, small organizations, and small
governmental jurisdictions.
    For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's rule on small
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as defined
by the Small Business Administration's (SBA) regulations at 13 CFR
121.201; (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; and (3) a small organization that is
any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated
and is not dominant in its field.
    After considering the economic impacts of today's proposed rule on
small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The small
entities directly regulated by this proposed rule are 138 individual
CRT exporters. We have determined that the annual compliance cost of
the rule, as a percentage of annual sales, is less than 0.1 percent.
Based on the above, the Agency has determined that the rule will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
    Although this proposed rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities, EPA nonetheless has
tried to reduce the impact of this rule on small entities. We continue
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 Reform Act

    This action does not contain a Federal mandate 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.
Because these direct costs are well below the $100 million annual
direct cost threshold, this proposed rule is not subject to the
requirements of sections 202 or 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA). This proposed 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. EPA does not
authorize States to administer Federal import/export functions in any
section of the RCRA hazardous waste regulations because of the Federal
government's special role in matters of foreign policy.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as
specified in Executive Order 13132. Specifically, this proposed rule
does not have Federalism implications because the State and local
governments do not administer the export and import requirements under
RCRA. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this action.

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

    This proposed rule does not have tribal implications, as specified
in Executive Order 13175. No Tribal governments are known to own or
operate businesses that may be affected by this rule. Thus, Executive
Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

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

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997) because it is not economically significant as defined
in Executive Order 12866, and because the Agency does not believe the
environmental health or safety risks addressed by this action present a
disproportionate risk to children residing in the United States. This
proposed rule is intended to improve regulatory efficiency and increase
accountability among all parties associated with the export of used
CRTs whether sent for recycling and reuse, and does not directly affect
the level of protection provided to human health or the environment in
the United States.

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

    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' as defined in
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)), because it is not
likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. As defined in Executive Order 13211, a
``significant energy action'' is any action by an agency (normally
published in the Federal Register) that promulgates or is expected to
lead to the promulgation of a final rule or regulation, including
notices of inquiry, advance notices of proposed rulemaking, and notices
of proposed rulemaking that: (1) Is a significant regulatory action
under Executive Order 12866 or any successor order and is likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy; or (2) is designated by OMB as a significant energy action.
This proposed rule does not involve the supply, distribution, or use of
energy and is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order
12866. Thus, Executive Order 13211 does not apply to this action.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory
activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus standards bodies. NTTAA directs EPA to provide
Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use
available and applicable voluntary consensus standards. This proposed
rulemaking does not involve technical standards. Therefore, EPA is not
considering the use of any voluntary consensus standards.

J. Executive Order 12898: Environmental Justice

    Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes
Federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs Federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
    EPA has determined that this proposed rule will not have
disproportionately high and/or adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not
directly affect the level of protection provided to human health or the
environment in the United States. Rather, this proposed rule is
intended to improve regulatory

efficiency and increase accountability among all parties associated
with the export of used CRTs, whether for recycling or reuse.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 260

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Hazardous waste, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 261

    Environmental protection, Hazardous waste, Solid waste, Recycling.

RIN 2050-AG68: Revision to the Export Provisions of the Cathode Ray
Tube (CRT) Rule

    Dated: March 2, 2012.
Lisa P. Jackson,
Administrator.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, Parts 260 and 261 of title
40, Chapter I of the Code of Federal Regulations are proposed to be
amended as follows:

PART 260--HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM: GENERAL

    1. The authority citation for part 260 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6921-6927, 6930, 6934,
6937, 6938, 6939, and 6974.

Subpart B--Definitions

    2. Section 260.10 is amended by adding in alphabetical order the
definition of ``CRT exporter'' to read as follows:

Sec.  260.10  Definitions.

* * * * *
    CRT exporter means any person in the United States who initiates a
transaction to send used CRTs outside the United States territories for
recycling or reuse, or any intermediary in the United States arranging
for such export.
* * * * *

PART 261--IDENTIFICATION AND LISTING OF HAZARDOUS WASTE

    3. The authority citation for part 261 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6921, 6922, 6924(y), and
6938.

Subpart A--General

    4. Section 261.39 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(5)(i)(F) to
read as follows:

Sec.  261.39  Conditional Exclusion for Used, Broken Cathode Ray tubes
(CRTs) and Processed CRT Glass Undergoing Recycling.

    (a) * * *
    (5) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (F) The name and address of the recycler or recyclers and the
estimated quantity of CRTs to be sent to each facility, as well as the
names of any alternate recyclers.
* * * * *
    (x) CRT exporters must file with EPA no later than March 1 of each
year, a report summarizing the quantities (in kilograms), frequency of
shipment, and ultimate destination(s) (i.e., the facility or facilities
where the recycling occurs) of all CRTs exported during the previous
calendar year. Such reports must also include the following:
    (A) The name, EPA ID number (if applicable), and mailing and site
address of the exporter;
    (B) The calendar year covered by the report;
    (C) A certification signed by the exporter which states:

    ``I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined
and am familiar with the information submitted in this and all
attached documents, and that based on my inquiry of those
individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I
believe that the submitted information is true, accurate, and
complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for
submitting false information including the possibility of fine and
imprisonment.''

    (xi) Annual reports must be submitted to the office specified in
paragraph (ii) of this section. Exporters must keep copies of annual
reports for a period of at least three years from the due date of the
report.
* * * * *
    5. Section 261.41 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as
follows:

Sec.  261.41  Notification and Recordkeeping for Used, Intact Cathode
Ray Tubes (CRTs) Exported for Reuse.

    (a) CRT exporters who export used, intact CRTs for reuse must send
a notification to EPA. This notification may cover export activities
extending over a twelve (12) month or lesser period. The notification
must be in writing, signed by the exporter, and include the following
information:
    (1) Name, mailing address, telephone number and EPA ID number (if
applicable) of the exporter of the CRTs.
    (2) The estimated frequency or rate at which the CRTs are to be
exported and the period of time over which they are to be exported.
    (3) The estimated total quantity of CRTs specified in kilograms.
    (4) All points of entry to and departure from each transit country
through which the CRTs will pass, a description of the approximate
length of time the CRTs will remain in such country and the nature of
their handling while there.
    (5) A description of the means by which each shipment of the CRTs
will be transported (e.g., mode of transportation vehicle (air,
highway, rail, water, etc.), type(s) of container (drums, boxes, tanks,
etc.)).
    (6) The name and address of the ultimate destination facility or
facilities where the CRTs will be reused and the estimated quantity of
CRTs to be sent to each facility, as well as the name of any alternate
destination facility or facilities.
    (7) A description of the manner in which the CRTs will be reused
(including reuse after refurbishment) in the foreign country that will
be receiving the CRTs.
    (8) A certification signed by the exporter which states:

    ``I certify under penalty of law that the CRTs described in this
notice are fully functioning or capable of being functional after
refurbishment. I certify under penalty of law that I have personally
examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this and
all attached documents, and that based on my inquiry of those
individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I
believe that the submitted information is true, accurate, and
complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for
submitting false information including the possibility of fine and
imprisonment.''
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2012-6276 Filed 3-14-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 110 (Friday, June 7, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 34380]
[FR Doc No: 2013-13604]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0293; FRL-9821-6]

Biennial Determination of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant's
Compliance With Applicable Federal Environmental Laws for the Period
2010 to 2012

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Based on documentation submitted by the U.S. Department of
Energy (DOE) for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or ``we'') determined that,
between 2010 and 2012, DOE operated the WIPP facility in compliance
with applicable Federal statutes, regulations, and permit requirements
designated in Section 9(a)(1) of the WIPP Land Withdrawal Act, as
amended. The Secretary of Energy was notified of the determination via
a letter from EPA Acting Administrator Bob Perciasepe dated May 29,
2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nick Stone; telephone number: (214)
665-7226; address: WIPP Project Officer, Mail Code 6PD-O, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, TX
75202.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

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

    1. Docket. EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0293; FRL-9821-6]. Publicly available
docket materials are available either electronically through
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air and Radiation Docket in
the EPA Docket Center, (EPA/DC) EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution
Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is
open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is
(202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air and Radiation
Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. As provided in EPA's regulations at 40 CFR
Part 2, and in accordance with normal EPA docket procedures, if copies
of any docket materials are requested, a reasonable fee may be charged
for photocopying.
    2. Electronic Access. You may access this Federal Register document
electronically through the EPA Internet under the ``Federal Register''
listings at http://www.regulations.gov.

II. Background

    EPA made this determination under the authority of Section 9 of the
WIPP Land Withdrawal Act (WIPP LWA, Pub. L. 102-579 and 104-201).
Section 9(a)(1) of the WIPP LWA requires that, as of the date of the
enactment of the WIPP LWA, DOE shall comply with respect to WIPP with
(1) regulations for the management and storage of radioactive waste (40
CFR Part 191, Subpart A); (2) the Clean Air Act; (3) the Solid Waste
Disposal Act; (4) the Safe Drinking Water Act; (5) the Toxic Substances
Control Act; (6) the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act; and (7) all other applicable Federal
laws pertaining to public health and safety or the environment. Section
9(a)(2) of the WIPP LWA requires DOE biennially to submit to EPA
documentation of continued compliance with the laws, regulations, and
permit requirements set forth in Section 9(a)(1). (DOE must also submit
similar documentation of compliance with the Solid Waste Disposal Act
to the State of New Mexico.) Section 9(a)(3) requires the Administrator
of EPA to determine on a biennial basis, following the submittal of
documentation of compliance by the Secretary of DOE, whether the WIPP
is in compliance with the pertinent laws, regulations, and permit
requirements, as set forth at Section 9(a)(1).
    We determined that for the period 2010 to 2012, the DOE-submitted
documentation showed continued compliance with 40 CFR Part 191, subpart
A, the Clean Air Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act, the Toxic Substances
Control Act, and the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act. With respect to other applicable
Federal laws pertaining to public health and safety or the environment,
as required by Section 9(a)(1)(G), DOE's documentation also indicates
that DOE was in compliance with the Clean Water Act, the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), and certain
statutes under the jurisdiction of the Department of Interior.
    This determination is not in any way related to, or a part of, our
certification and recertification decisions regarding whether the WIPP
complies with EPA's disposal regulations for transuranic radioactive
waste at 40 CFR part 191.

    Dated: May 29, 2013.
Bob Perciasepe,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2013-13604 Filed 6-6-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 189 (Thursday, September 29, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 60599]
[FR Doc No: 2011-25110]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Reports, Forms and Recordkeeping Requirements Agency Information
Collection Activity Under OMB Review

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this notice announces that the Information
Collection Request (ICR) abstracted below has been forwarded to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comment. The ICR
describes the nature of the information collections and their expected
burden. The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment period was
published on June 24, 2011 [76 FR 37189].

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before October 31, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrea Noel, National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, Office of Defects Investigation,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., W48-221, Washington, DC 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

    Title: Consumer Complaint
    OMB Number: 2127-0042.
    Type of Request: Extension of a currently approved collection.
    Affected Public: Individuals and households

Abstract

    Under 49 U.S.C. 30166(e), NHTSA reasonably may require a
manufacturer of a motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment to keep
records, and a manufacturer, distributor, or dealer to make reports, to
enable (NHTSA) to decide whether the manufacturer, distributor or
dealer has complied or is complying with this chapter or a regulation
prescribed under this chapter.
    49 U.S.C. 30118(c) requires manufacturers to notify NHTSA and
owners, purchasers, and dealers if the manufacturer (1) learn that any
vehicle or equipment manufactured by it contains a defect and decides
in good faith that the defect relates to motor vehicle safety, or (2)
decides in good faith that the vehicle or equipment does not comply
with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard. The only way
for the agency to decide if and when a manufacturer learned of a
safety-related defect or decided in good faith that some products did
not comply with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard is
for the agency to have access to the information available to the
manufacturer.
    Affected Public: Business or other-for-profit, individuals or
households.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 33,590.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 869.

ADDRESSES: Send comments, within 30 days, to the Office of Information
and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725-17th
Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503, Attention NHTSA Desk Officer.
    Comments are invited on: Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Department, including whether the information will have practical
utility; the accuracy of the Department's estimate of the burden of the
proposed information collection; ways to enhance the quality, utility
and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to minimize
the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including
the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of
information technology.
    A Comment to OMB is most effective if OMB receives it within 30
days of publication.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on September 26, 2011.
Frank S. Borris,
Director, Office of Defects Investigation, Office of Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2011-25110 Filed 9-28-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 28 (Monday, February 11, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3100-3101]
[FR Doc No: 2019-01704]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2018-0828; Airspace Docket No. 18-AGL-22]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of Class E Airspace; Lawrenceville, IL

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action modifies Class E airspace extending upward from
700 feet above the surface at Lawrenceville-Vincennes International
Airport, Lawrenceville, IL, and Mount Carmel Municipal Airport, Mount
Carmel, IL. This action is due to the decommissioning of the
Lawrenceville VHF omnidirectional range (VOR) navigation aid, which
provided navigation information for the instrument procedures at this
airport, as part of the VOR Minimum Operational Network (MON) Program.
Airspace redesign is necessary for the safety and management of
instrument flight rules (IFR) operations at this airport.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, April 25, 2019. 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 7400.11C, 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 FAA Order 7400.11C 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: Jeffrey Claypool, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Central Service Center, 10101
Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177; 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 amends Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the
surface at Lawrenceville-Vincennes International Airport,
Lawrenceville, IL, and Mount Carmel Municipal Airport, Mount Carmel,
IL, to support IFR operations at these airports.

History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal
Register (83 FR 51898; October 15, 2018) for Docket No. FAA-2018-0828
to amend Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the
surface at Lawrenceville-Vincennes International Airport,
Lawrenceville, IL, and Mount Carmel Municipal Airport, Mount Carmel,
IL. 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 E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order 7400.11C, dated August 13, 2018, and effective September 15,
2018, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class 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 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 13, 2018, and effective September 15,
2018. FAA Order 7400.11C is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11C lists Class A,
B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Rule

    This amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 modifies the Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface to within a 6.7-mile radius (reduced from a 7-mile
radius) of Lawrenceville-Vincennes International Airport,
Lawrenceville, IL; removes the Lawrenceville VOR/DME and the associated
extension to the northeast of the Lawrenceville-Vincennes International
Airport; and removes the extension to the south of Mount Carmel
Municipal Airport, Mount Carmel, IL.
    This action is due to an airspace review caused by the
decommissioning of the Lawrenceville VOR, which provided navigation
information to the instrument procedures at these airports, as part of
the VOR MON Program.

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, does 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 5-6.5.a. 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 7400.11C,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 13, 2018, and
effective September 15, 2018, is amended as follows:

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

* * * * *

AGL IL E5 Lawrenceville, IL [Amended]

Lawrenceville-Vincennes International Airport, IL
    (Lat. 38[deg]45'51'' N, long. 87[deg]36'20'' W)
Mount Carmel Municipal Airport, IL
    (Lat. 38[deg]36'24'' N, long. 87[deg]43'36'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.7-mile radius of Lawrenceville-Vincennes International
Airport, and within a 6.5-mile radius of Mount Carmel Municipal
Airport.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on February 4, 2019.
John A. Witucki,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2019-01704 Filed 2-8-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 249 (Thursday, December 29, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 80245]
[FR Doc No: 2022-28291]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 34790; 812-15408]

Touchstone Strategic Trust, et al.

December 22, 2022.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'' or ``SEC'').

ACTION: Notice.

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

    Notice of an application under section 6(c) of the Investment
Company Act of 1940 (``Act'') for an exemption from section 15(a) of
the Act, as well as from certain disclosure requirements in rule 20a-1
under the Act, Item 19(a)(3) of Form N-1A, Items 22(c)(1)(ii),
22(c)(1)(iii), 22(c)(8) and 22(c)(9) of Schedule 14A under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and sections 6-07(2)(a), (b), and (c)
of Regulation S-X (``Disclosure Requirements'').

Summary of Application: The requested exemption would permit Applicants
to enter into and materially amend subadvisory agreements with
subadvisers without shareholder approval and would grant relief from
the Disclosure Requirements as they relate to fees paid to the
subadvisers.

Applicants: Touchstone Strategic Trust, Touchstone ETF Trust,
Touchstone Funds Group Trust, Touchstone Variable Series Trust and
Touchstone Advisors, Inc.

Filing Dates: The application was filed on November 15, 2022.

Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An order granting the requested
relief will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing.
Interested persons may request a hearing on any application by emailing
the SEC's Secretary at [email protected] and serving the
Applicants with a copy of the request by email, if an email address is
listed for the relevant Applicant below, or personally or by mail, if a
physical address is listed for the relevant Applicant below. Hearing
requests should be received by the Commission by 5:30 p.m. on January
17, 2023, and should be accompanied by proof of service on the
Applicants, in the form of an affidavit, or, for lawyers, a certificate
of service. Pursuant to rule 0-5 under the Act, hearing requests should
state the nature of the writer's interest, any facts bearing upon the
desirability of a hearing on the matter, the reason for the request,
and the issues contested. Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing
may request notification by emailing the Commission's Secretary.

ADDRESSES: The Commission: [email protected]. Applicants:
Meredyth A. Whitford-Schultz,
[email protected]; Clair Pagnano;
[email protected]; and Abigail Hemnes;
[email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laura L. Solomon, Senior Counsel, or
Terri G. Jordan, Branch Chief, at<PHONE_NUMBER> (Division of
Investment Management, Chief Counsel's Office).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For Applicants' representations, legal
analysis, and conditions, please refer to Applicants' application,
dated November 15, 2022, which may be obtained via the Commission's
website by searching for the file number at the top of this document,
or for an Applicant using the Company name search field on the SEC's
EDGAR system. The SEC's EDGAR system may be searched at https://www.sec.gov/edgar/searchedgar/legacy/companysearch.html. You may also
call the SEC's Public Reference Room at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
under delegated authority.
Vanessa A. Countryman,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-28291 Filed 12-28-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 105 (Thursday, May 31, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25079-25081]
[FR Doc No: 2018-11608]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-83318; File No. SR-BOX-2018-18]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BOX Options Exchange LLC; Notice
of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Adopt IM-7130-1 to Rule 7130

May 24, 2018.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on May 16, 2018, BOX Options Exchange LLC (``BOX'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items
have been prepared by the self-regulatory organization. The Commission
is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule
change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to adopt IM-7130-1 to Rule 7130. 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 website at http://boxoptions.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 self-regulatory organization
included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the
proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The self-regulatory organization
has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the
most significant aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to adopt IM-7130-1 to Rule 7130 to provide
that the Exchange may make available certain

BOX Book \3\ information to Participants upon request. Specifically,
Participants may inquire with the Exchange as to the amount of any
priority interest on the BOX Book.\4\ This information is for advisory
purposes only and will be provided on a best efforts basis verbally.\5\
For the purposes of the proposed rule, ``priority interest'' is the
number of Public Customer contracts and Non-Public Customer contracts
that are ranked ahead of such Public Customer contracts at a given
price for a specific option class. Floor Brokers may inquire with an
Options Exchange Official or his or her designee. All other
Participants may contact the MOC.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The term ``BOX Book'' means the electronic book of orders on
each single option series maintained by the BOX Trading Host. See
Rule 100(a)(10).
    \4\ The proposed change is similar to the floor procedures of
NYSE Arca (``Arca''). See Arca Regulatory Bulletin RB-16-04
(February 19, 2016). Floor Brokers on NYSE Arca may inquire at with
the Trading Official at the post to the amount of any priority
interest on NYSE Arca's electronic book. The Exchange notes that
there are a few minor differences between the floor procedure of
NYSE Arca and the proposed rule. Specifically, the Exchange is
proposing to make the proposed information available to all
Participants, not only Floor Brokers. The Exchange believes this
difference is reasonable because the Exchange is providing the
information to all Participants and therefore the Exchange is not
discriminating against any type of Participant. Further, the
proposed rule provides additional clarity and specificity as to how
the information is provided and what is included. The Exchange
believes this difference is reasonable because the Exchange is
providing greater clarity to Participants which removes the
potential for any confusion. Additionally, the MIAX Order Feed
offers similar information to subscribers of the data feed.
Specifically, the MIAX Order Feed provides real-time data including
the limit price, origin, and side of each order for the entire order
book to its users. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74759
(April 17, 2018), 82 FR 22749 (April 23, 2015)(SR-MIAX-2015-28). The
Exchange notes that there are a few differences between the proposal
and the MIAX Order Feed. First, the MIAX Order Feed provides the
limit price, origin, and size of every order on the entire order
book while the Exchange is proposing to only provide the amount of
priority interest. The Exchange believes this is a reasonable
difference because the Exchange is providing a limited amount of
relevant information to Participants executing orders. Specifically,
as explained in greater detail below, the proposed information is
useful for Floor Brokers executing QOO Orders from the Trading
Floor. Additionally, given the manual nature of providing the
proposed information, it is reasonable to limit the quantity of
information provided to Participants. Second, the MIAX Order Feed is
a continuous data feed while the Exchange is proposing to provide
the information verbally in response to one off requests. The
Exchange believes that this difference is reasonable because it
allows the Exchange to provide a limited amount of information in an
efficient manner without using substantial Exchange resources.
    \5\ An Options Exchange Official will provide the requested
information when doing so does not interfere with their regulatory
responsibilities. Further, the BOX Book is continuously being
updated through the actions of other market participants; therefore,
there is no guarantee that the information provided will remain
accurate once verbally communicated.
    \6\ The term ``Market Operations Center'' or ``MOC'' means the
BOX Market Operations Center, which provides market support for
Options Participants during the trading day. See Rule 100(a)(32).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange is proposing to offer this information at no cost to
Participants. The process of providing the requested information to
Participants is manual in nature.\7\ An Options Exchange Official or
his or her designee, or the MOC, may provide this information to
Participants upon request. The Exchange notes that any information will
be provided on an anonymous basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Participants must request this information each time; the
Exchange will not provide continuous updated information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed change will provide additional visibility to the BOX
Book for Participants looking to execute orders on the Exchange. For
example, a Floor Broker sourcing liquidity could use this information
as another means for probing the market. Specifically, since the
initiating side \8\ of a Qualified Open Outcry Order (``QOO Order'')
\9\ will match with Public Customer Orders on the BOX Book and any
other orders or quotes ranked ahead of such Public Customer Orders at
the execution price first,\10\ this information is a valuable piece in
understanding the total liquidity available. By providing the amount of
priority interest on the BOX Book to a Floor Broker, the Floor Broker
will be able to determine the number of contracts on the BOX Book that
will be able to match with the initiating side. Further, this will
provide certainty to the Floor Broker of the number of contracts that
must be located from additional liquidity sources in order to execute a
QOO Order. Additionally, knowing the amount of priority interest will
provide a Floor Broker with the number of contracts that the Floor
Broker must sweep in order to execute a QOO Order when there is resting
Public Customer interest at the execution price of the QOO Order.\11\
Other Participants may also find this information useful in determining
the composition of liquidity on the Exchange's Book.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ A QOO Order has two sides; the initiating side and the
contra-side. The initiating side is the order which must be filled
in its entirety. The contra-side must guarantee the full size of the
initiating side of the QOO Order and may provide a book sweep size
as provided in Rule 7600(h). See Rule 7600(a)(1).
    \9\ A QOO Order is a two-sided order that is used by Floor
Brokers to execute transactions from the Trading Floor. See Rule
7600.
    \10\ See Rule 7600(d)(2).
    \11\ The executing Floor Broker could send an order to clear out
the priority interest or use the book sweep size feature as provided
in Rule 7600(h). The Exchange notes that the book sweep size feature
will only help the Floor Broker clear priority interest on the
contra-side of the QOO Order because the initiating side of a QOO
Order must be executed in its entirety.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act \12\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act \13\ in particular, in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general to protect investors and the public
interest. In particular, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change
is consistent with the offerings of other options exchanges.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \14\ See supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed change removes impediments
to and perfects the mechanisms of a free and open market and a national
market system and, in general, protects investors and the public
interest by providing increased transparency to Participants. The
Exchange believes the proposed change will enhance a Floor Broker's
ability to execute QOO Orders, leading to increased executions on the
Exchange. The Exchange believes the proposed change will lead to
increased interaction with the BOX Book because Floor Brokers will be
aware of the amount of liquidity available on the BOX Book that may
interact with their QOO Order and may choose to use such liquidity when
executing orders from the Trading Floor or use a separate order to
sweep that interest. As such, the proposed change has the potential to
provide more liquidity on the Exchange to the benefit of all market
participants. Additionally, the Exchange believes that the proposed
change will be a valuable tool for all Participants probing the market
by providing greater clarity on the composition and availability of
liquidity. As such, the Exchange believes that the proposed change will
benefit all market participants because it will provide the opportunity
for increased BOX Book interaction.
    The Exchange believes that providing the proposed information is
fair, reasonable and not unfairly discriminatory. The proposed
information is available to all Participants regardless of whether the
Participant accesses the Exchange electronically or has a presence on
the Trading Floor.

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

    The proposed change would allow the Exchange to provide
Participants with certain information. As discussed above, the proposed
change aligns the rules of the Exchange with the floor procedures and
rules of other options exchanges \15\ and will allow the Exchange to
compete with these other options exchanges. The Exchange believes it
will help Participants at the Exchange to compete for executions
against market participants at other exchanges by providing an
additional tool to the Participants on BOX. This, in turn, helps the
Exchange compete against other exchanges in a deeply competitive
landscape. As such, 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
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange has neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period up to 90 days (i) as the
Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be
appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve or disapprove the proposed rule change, or
    (B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be 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 protected]. Please include
File Number SR-BOX-2018-18 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-2018-18. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-BOX-2018-18 and should be submitted on
or before June 21, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-11608 Filed 5-30-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


     UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

                             OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY
AND POLLUTION PREVENTION
MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD

RE:  	Meeting with the American Coatings Association on the Regulation of Persistent, Bioaccumulative, and Toxic Chemicals Under TSCA Section 6(h)
List of Contents
 Meeting Summary
 Attendees

Meeting Summary

On June 29, 2022, representatives from EPA met with the American Coatings Association (ACA) to discuss comments submitted in docket EPA-HQ-OPPT-2021-0598 on the Regulation of Persistent, Bioaccumulative, and Toxic Chemicals Under TSCA Section 6(h); Phenol, Isopropylated Phosphate (3:1); Compliance Date Extension, published March 8, 2022. During the meeting, ACA gave an overview of their memberships' concerns regarding the upcoming compliance deadlines for the industrial use of PIP (3:1) as an intermediate in cyanoacrylate adhesives, and in end use in adhesives and sealants. ACA presented on the worker protection measures that their membership currently has in place. ACA also requested that in the upcoming TSCA section 6(h) rulemaking that was indicated in the March 8, 2022 Compliance Date Extension, EPA consider excluding from prohibition uses of PIP (3:1) on which it had previously not made any determinations, specifically; use as a precursor in marine antifouling coating and in intumescent coatings applied to buildings to prolong fire resistance time. EPA gave an overview of the TSCA section 6(h) rulemaking activities to date. ACA indicated they would continue engaging with the EPA rulemaking process.
Attendees
EPA:
Niva Kramek
Cindy Wheeler
Gabriela Rossner

ACA:
Riaz Zaman