[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 125 (Friday, June 28, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 30933-30939]
[FR Doc No: 2019-13546]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0493; FRL-9985-41]

Ethiprole; Pesticide Tolerances

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of the
insecticide ethiprole in or on coffee, green bean. Bayer CropScience LP
requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FFDCA).

DATES: This regulation is effective June 28, 2019. Objections and
requests for

hearings must be received on or before August 27, 2019, and must be
filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178
(see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0493, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Please review the visitor instructions and
additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael L. Goodis, P.E., Director,
Registration Division (750P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington,
DC 20460-0001; main telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

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

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

    You may access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA's
tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Government
Printing Office's e-CFR site at http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl.

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

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0493 in the subject line on the first
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must
be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before
August 27, 2019. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections and
hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for
inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without
prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing
request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0493, by one of
the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance

    In the Federal Register of October 24, 2018 (83 FR 53594) (FRL-
9983-46), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP
7E8586) by Bayer CropScience LP, P.O. Box 12014, 2 T.W. Alexander Dr.,
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-2014. The petition requested that 40
CFR 180.652 be amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the
insecticide ethiprole, 5-amino-1-[2,6-dichloro-4-
(trifluoromethyl)phenyl]-4-(ethylsulfinyl)-1H-pyrazole-3-carbonitrile,
in or on coffee (green beans) and roasted coffee and instant coffee at
0.1 parts per million (ppm). That document referenced a summary of the
petition prepared by Bayer CropScience LP, the registrant, which is
available in the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. These tolerances
were requested to cover residues of ethiprole in or on coffee resulting
from uses of this pesticide on coffee outside the United States. There
is no current U.S. registration for use of ethiprole on coffee. The
only comment submitted to this docket supported this rulemaking.
    Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA has
concluded that tolerances are not needed for the processed coffee
commodities since available data demonstrate that residues of ethiprole
did not concentrate in these processed commodities.

III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

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

EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with ethiprole
follows.

A. Toxicological Profile

    EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children.
    Ethiprole has a low acute toxicity via the oral, dermal, and
inhalation routes of exposure, and is not a skin sensitizer nor a skin
or eye irritant. In the mammalian toxicology database, the critical
effects of ethiprole are liver toxicity and thyroid toxicity. The rat
was the most sensitive species overall after administration of
ethiprole. Evidence of hepatotoxicity is seen in the rat, dog, and
mouse and was manifested as increased liver weight and hepatocellular
hypertrophy and changes in clinical chemistry such as increased alanine
transaminase and alkaline phosphates activities; increased cholesterol
and triglycerides levels; and increased total protein concentration.
Thyroid toxicity was observed in the rat and was manifested as
increased thyroid weight, thyroid follicular hypertrophy along with
higher TSH plasma levels, and reduced T4 (thyroxine) plasma levels.
Mechanism studies of thyroid toxicity suggested that ethiprole acts by
disrupting thyroid hormone homeostasis and indirectly influences the
thyroid by inducing the hepatic microsomal enzyme T4- glucuronyl
transferase.
    Ethiprole is neither a reproductive nor a developmental toxicant.
Although no teratogenic effects were observed in the existing database,
there is uncertainty regarding the potential impact of ethiprole on
thyroid hormone homeostasis in the developing organism.
    In the acute neurotoxicity study, clinical signs showed consistent
effects that might be anticipated for a chemical interacting with
neurotransmitter chloride channels, including low arousal levels,
increased eye closure, increased incidence of body tremors, and
decreased rearing counts in females at the mid dose. However, no
neurotoxicity effects were noted in the subchronic neurotoxicity study
up to and including the highest dose of 400 ppm (33.0 mg/kg/day). There
were no effects on neuropathology in any of the studies.
    Based on a battery of mutagenicity studies, ethiprole is not
considered to be genotoxic. In accordance with the EPA's Final
Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment (March 2005), ethiprole is
classified as ``Suggestive Evidence of Carcinogenicity, but Not
Sufficient to Assess Human Carcinogenicity Potential'' based on
increased incidences of hepatocellular adenomas in females at the
highest dose tested in the carcinogenicity study in mice. While the
evidence from animal data is suggestive of carcinogenicity, a cancer
risk to humans from dietary exposure to ethiprole is of low concern,
and a nonlinear approach is appropriate for assessing potential cancer
risk based on the following weight-of-evidence considerations:
    1. The liver tumors in mice were benign with no progression to
malignancy;
    2. The thyroid tumors in rats were also benign (with no progression
to malignancy), and the increase in the tumor incidences at the high
dose did not reach statistical significance when compared to controls;
    3. In both species (mice and rats), tumors were observed only at
the high dose level (i.e., there was a lack of evidence of a dose-
response relationship);
    4. There is no concern for mutagenicity/genotoxicity;
    5. The no-observed-adverse-effect level (NOAEL) of 0.85 milligrams/
kilograms/day (mg/kg/day) used for deriving the cRfD is approximately
86-fold lower than the dose (73 mg/kg/day) that induced benign tumors
in mice; and
    6. The reduction of the Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor
(FQPA SF) to 1x yields a chronic Population Adjusted Dose (cPAD) of
0.03 mg/kg/day. The Agency has determined that the cPAD will adequately
account for all chronic effects, including carcinogenicity, likely to
result from exposure to ethiprole.
    More detailed information on the studies received and the nature of
the adverse effects caused by ethiprole as well as the NOAEL and the
LOAEL from the toxicological studies can be found in the document
entitled, ``Ethiprole: Human Health Risk Assessment for a Proposed
Tolerance without U.S. Registration in/on Imported Coffee, Green
Bean,'' dated April 29, 2019, by going to http://www.regulations.gov.
The referenced document is available in the docket established by this
action, which is described under ADDRESSES. Locate and click on the
hyperlink for docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0493. Double-click on
the document to view the referenced information.

B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern

    Once a pesticide's toxicological profile is determined, EPA
identifies toxicological points of departure (POD) and levels of
concern to use in evaluating the risk posed by human exposure to the
pesticide. For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, the toxicological POD is used as the basis for
derivation of reference values for risk assessment. PODs are developed
based on a careful analysis of the doses in each toxicological study to
determine the dose at which no adverse effects are observed (the NOAEL)
and the lowest dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified
(the LOAEL). Uncertainty/safety factors are used in conjunction with
the POD to calculate a safe exposure level--generally referred to as a
population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a reference dose (RfD)--and a safe
margin of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes
that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the
Agency estimates risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of
the adverse effect expected in a lifetime. For more information on the
general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete
description of the risk assessment process, see http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/riskassess.htm.
    A summary of the toxicological endpoints for ethiprole used for
human risk assessment is shown in Table 1 of this unit.

   Table 1--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Ethiprole for Use in Human Health Risk Assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    Point of departure
        Exposure/scenario            and uncertainty/     RfD, PAD, LOC for     Study and toxicological effects
                                      safety factors       risk assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute Dietary (All populations)..  NOAEL = 35 mg/kg/day  Acute RfD = 0.35 mg/ Acute Neurotoxicity in Rats Study.
                                   UFA = 10x...........   kg/day.             LOAEL = 250 mg/kg/day based on
                                   UFH = 10x...........  aPAD = 0.35 mg/kg/    decreased locomotor activity and
                                   FQPA SF = 1x........   day.                 functional observational battery
                                   Combined UFs = 100x.                        (FOB) findings in both sexes on
                                                                               the day of treatment.
Chronic Dietary (All populations)  NOAEL = 0.85 mg/kg/   Chronic RfD = 0.03   Combined Chronic/Carcinogenicity
                                    day.                  mg/kg/day.           Oral (Dietary) Toxicity in Rats.
                                   UFA = 3x............  cPAD = 0.03 mg/kg/   LOAEL = 3.21/4.40 mg/kg/day M/F
                                   UFH = 10x...........   day.                 based on observed effects in the
                                   FQPA SF = 1x........                        thyroid and/or liver
                                   Combined UFs = 30x..                        (histopathologic changes,
                                                                               increased organ weights, and/or
                                                                               altered thyroid hormone or
                                                                               bilirubin levels).
                                  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer Dietary (Oral, Dermal,      Classification: ``Suggestive Evidence of Carcinogenicity, but Not Sufficient
 Inhalation).                       to Assess Human Carcinogenicity Potential'' Quantification using a cancer
                                    potency factor is not needed; a nonlinear approach based on the cRfD is
                                    protective of potential cancer risk.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. LOAEL = lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level. NOAEL = no-
  observed-adverse-effect-level. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose.
  UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among
  members of the human population (intraspecies).

    More detailed information on the toxicological endpoints for
ethiprole can be found in the document entitled, ``Ethiprole: Human
Health Risk Assessment for a Proposed Tolerance without U.S.
Registration in/on Imported Coffee, Green Bean,'' dated April 29, 2019,
by going to http://www.regulations.gov. The referenced document is
available in the docket established by this action, which is described
under ADDRESSES. Locate and click on the hyperlink for docket ID number
EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0493. Double-click on the document to view the
referenced information.

C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to ethiprole, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-for
tolerances as well as all existing ethiprole tolerances in 40 CFR
180.652 as follows:
    i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk
assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological
study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring
as a result of a 1-day or single exposure. In estimating acute dietary
(food and drinking water) exposure, EPA used food consumption
information from the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model--Food Commodity
Intake Database (DEEM-FCIDTM, Version 3.18), which
incorporates 2003-2008 consumption data from the United States
Department of Agriculture's (USDA's) National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey, What We Eat in America, (NHANES/WWEIA). An
unrefined, acute dietary exposure assessment was conducted assuming
tolerance-level residues and assuming 100 percent crop treated (PCT).
    ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment, EPA used DEEM-FCIDTM, Version 3.18, which
incorporates 2003-2008 consumption data from the USDA's NHANES/WWEIA.
An unrefined chronic dietary risk analysis was conducted assuming
tolerance-level residues and 100 PCT.
    iii. Cancer. As explained in unit III.A., quantification of risk
using a non-linear approach (i.e., a cPAD) will adequately account for
all chronic toxicity, including carcinogenicity, that could result from
exposure to ethiprole. No separate exposure assessment pertaining to
cancer risk was performed for ethiprole; rather, EPA relied on the
chronic exposure assessment described in this Unit for assessing the
risk of all chronic effects, including cancer.
    iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) information.
EPA did not use anticipated residue information in the dietary
assessment for ethiprole. Tolerance-level residues and/or 100% CT were
assumed for all food commodities.
    More detailed information on the acute and chronic dietary (food
only) exposure and risk assessment for ethiprole can be found in the
document entitled, ``Ethiprole: Human Health Risk Assessment for a
Proposed Tolerance without U.S. Registration in/on Imported Coffee,
Green Bean,'' dated April 29, 2019, by going to http://www.regulations.gov. The referenced document is available in the docket
established by this action, which is described under ADDRESSES. Locate
and click on the hyperlink for docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0493.
Double-click on the document to view the referenced information.
    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. Ethiprole and its
degradates were not considered for drinking water assessment because
ethiprole is not registered for use in the U.S.; therefore, exposure to
residues of ethiprole in drinking water is not expected.
    3. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is
used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary
exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control,
termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets). Ethiprole is not
registered for any specific use patterns that would result in
residential exposure.
    Further information regarding EPA standard assumptions and generic
inputs for residential exposures may be found at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/trac/science/trac6a05.pdf.
    4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other

substances that have a common mechanism of toxicity.'' EPA has not made
a common mechanism of toxicity finding as to ethiprole and any other
substances, and ethiprole does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite
produced by other substances. For the purposes of this tolerance
action; therefore, EPA has not assumed that ethiprole has a common
mechanism of toxicity with other substances.
    For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which
chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity, and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals, see the policy statements
released by EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs concerning common
mechanism determinations and procedures for cumulating effects from
substances found to have a common mechanism on EPA's website at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative/.

D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

    1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10x) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the FQPA Safety
Factor (SF). In applying this provision, EPA either retains the default
value of 10x, or uses a different additional safety factor when
reliable data are available to EPA support the choice of a different
safety factor.
    2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. Although no teratogenic
effects were observed in the existing toxicology database, there is
uncertainty regarding the potential impact of ethiprole on thyroid
hormone homeostasis in the developing organism. Observations
demonstrated that thyroid hormones were affected in several studies
throughout the ethiprole database. Thyroid hormones may play a critical
role in the development of the nervous system.
    3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable hazard and exposure
data show the safety of infants and children would be adequately
protected if the FQPA SF were reduced to 1x. That decision is based on
the following findings:
    i. The toxicology database for ethiprole is complete for
establishing tolerances without U.S. registration purposes. Previously
the Agency determined that a CTA is required based on the weight-of-
evidence. Subsequently, the registrant submitted a request for a CTA
waiver. Based on a weight-of-evidence approach that considered the
relatively low exposure to the highest exposed populations and the fact
that had the 10x been retained, the exposure levels would still result
in estimated risks below the levels of concern, the Agency concludes
that a CTA in pregnant animals, fetuses, postnatal animals, and adult
animals is not required for ethiprole at this time.
    ii. In mammals, no neurotoxic effects were observed during the
subchronic neurotoxicity study in which adverse effects of increased
thyroid and liver weights were observed in males and females,
respectively. The acute neurotoxicity study showed decreased locomotor
activity (both sexes, day 1) and the FOB findings in both sexes on the
day of treatment (4 hours after dosing). The FOB findings included
increased tremors (females), decreased grooming (both sexes), decreased
arousal alert (females), increased number of animals for which no
assessment of gait was possible (females), increased eye closure
(females), increased standing/sitting hunched (females), decreased
activity and rearing counts (females), increased hindlimb and forelimb
grip strength (males), decreased splay (females, day 1), and increased
splay (males, day 8). The similarity in the NOAELs from the acute
neurotoxicity and subchronic neurotoxicity studies are consistent with
the metabolism data that suggesting that ethiprole is not accumulated
in the system. Therefore, a developmental neurotoxicity (DNT) study is
not required for ethiprole.
    iii. There is no evidence that ethiprole results in increased
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal
developmental studies or in young rats in the 2-generation reproduction
study.
    iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
database for ethiprole. The dietary assessment is based on high end
assumptions, assuming tolerance-level residues and 100 PCT. The
assessment will not underestimate the exposure and risk posed by
ethiprole.

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

    EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide
exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the
acute PAD (aPAD) and chronic PAD (cPAD). Since there are no registered
or proposed uses of ethiprole that result in residential exposure, the
acute and chronic aggregate exposure and risk assessments are equal to
the acute and chronic dietary exposure and risk estimates (food only),
respectively. Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term risks are
evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate food, water, and
residential exposure to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an adequate
MOE exists.
    1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk assessment takes into
account acute exposure estimates from dietary consumption of food and
drinking water. Using the exposure assumptions described in this Unit
for dietary and non-dietary acute exposures, EPA has concluded that
acute dietary exposure to ethiprole from food only will utilize <1% of
the aPAD for the general U.S. population. The most highly-exposed
population subgroup, all infants (<1 year old), utilized 2.1% of the
aPAD.
    2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
Unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic dietary
exposure to ethiprole from food only will utilize 2.0% of the cPAD for
the general U.S. population. The most highly-exposed population
subgroup, all infants (<1 year old), utilized 5.7% of the cPAD. Based
on the explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding residential use
patterns, chronic residential exposure to residues of ethiprole is not
expected.
    3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into
account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level). A short-term
adverse effect was identified; however, ethiprole is not registered for
any use patterns that would result in short-term residential exposure.
Short-term risk is assessed based on short-term residential exposure
plus chronic dietary exposure. Because there is no short-term
residential exposure and chronic dietary exposure has already been
assessed under the appropriately protective cPAD (which is at least as
protective as the POD used to assess short-term risk), no further
assessment of short-term risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the
chronic dietary risk assessment for evaluating short-term risk for
ethiprole.
    4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure
level). An intermediate-term adverse effect was identified; however,
ethiprole is not registered for any use patterns that would result in
intermediate-term residential exposure. Intermediate-term risk is
assessed based on intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic

dietary exposure. Because there is no intermediate-term residential
exposure and chronic dietary exposure has already been assessed under
the appropriately protective cPAD (which is at least as protective as
the POD used to assess intermediate-term risk), no further assessment
of intermediate-term risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the chronic
dietary risk assessment for evaluating intermediate-term risk for
ethiprole.
    5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. As discussed in Unit
III.A., EPA concluded that the nonlinear approach for assessing
potential cancer risk from exposure to ethiprole is appropriate. As
noted in this Unit, the chronic risk aggregate exposure to ethiprole is
below the Agency's level of concern; therefore, the Agency concludes
that there is not a cancer risk of concern from exposure to ethiprole.
    6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general U.S. population, or to infants and children from
aggregate exposure to ethiprole residues.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    The HPLC/MS-MS enforcement method, Method 01128, is acceptable for
determination of residues of ethiprole and its sulfone metabolite RPA
097973 for data collection in plant commodities. The GC-ECD method
(Report No. B003572) is suitable for determining residues of parent
ethiprole and RPA in milk, eggs and tissues. The FDA multiresidue
method testing study for ethiprole is adequate and indicates that PAM
multiresidue methods are not suitable for enforcing tolerances for
residues of ethiprole.
    The method may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry
Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD
20755-5350; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
B. International Residue Limits

    In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations
Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food
standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain
the reasons for departing from the Codex level. Codex has not
established maximum residue limits (MRLs) for residues of ethiprole in
coffee commodities; therefore, there are no harmonization issues at
this time.

V. Conclusion

    Therefore, a tolerance is established for residues of the
insecticide ethiprole, 5-amino-1-[2,6-dichloro-4-
(trifluoromethyl)phenyl]-4-(ethylsulfinyl)-1H-pyrazole-3-carbonitrile,
including its metabolites and degradates, in or on coffee, green bean
at 0.1 ppm. EPA is also amending the footnote in the table in paragraph
(a) to accommodate the coffee commodity.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action establishes a tolerance under FFDCA section 408(d) in
response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and
Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this action has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this action is not
subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), nor is it considered a
regulatory action under Executive Order 13771, entitled ``Reducing
Regulations and Controlling Regulatory Costs'' (82 FR 9339), February
3, 2017). This action does not contain any information collections
subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require any special considerations
under Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerance in this
final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
    This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this action. In addition, this
action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded
mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
    This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).

VII. Congressional Review Act

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

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

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

    Dated: June 19, 2019.
Michael Goodis,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

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

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

0
2. In Sec.  180.652, revise paragraph (a) to read as follows:

Sec.  180.652   Ethiprole; tolerances for residues.

    (a) General. Tolerances are established for residues of ethiprole,
including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the commodities in
the table below. Compliance with the tolerance levels specified below
is to be determined by measuring only ethiprole, 5-amino-1-[2,6-
dichloro-4-(trifluoromethyl)phenyl]-4-(ethylsulfinyl)-1H-pyrazole-3-
carbonitrile.

                        Table 1 to Paragraph (a)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Parts per
                          Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coffee, green bean \1\......................................         0.1
Rice, grain \1\.............................................         1.7
Tea, dried \1\..............................................          30
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no U.S. registrations for this commodity as of June 28,
  2019.

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2019-13546 Filed 6-27-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 229 (Thursday, November 30, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 83562-83563]
[FR Doc No: 2023-26270]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-3602-EM; Docket ID FEMA-2023-0001]

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands; Amendment No. 1 to
Notice of an Emergency Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of an emergency declaration for
the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (FEMA-3602-EM), dated
October 8, 2023, and related determinations.

DATES: This change occurred on October 8, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the
Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Teresa Y.
Serata, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer
for this emergency.
    This action terminates the appointment of Benigno B. Ruiz as
Federal Coordinating Officer for this emergency.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for
Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036,
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance

(Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation
Grant.

Deanne Criswell,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2023-26270 Filed 11-29-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register: August 7, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 151)]
[Notices]
[Page 44751-44752]
[DOCID:fr07au06-119]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-54232; File No. SR-NYSE-2004-56]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange Inc. (n/k/
a New York Stock Exchange LLC); Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule
Change Relating to Amendments to Exchange Rule 611, ``Disqualification
or Other Disability of Arbitrators''

 July 27, 2006.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (``Act''),\2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, notice is hereby given
that on October 12, 2004, the New York Stock Exchange Inc. (n/k/a New
York Stock Exchange LLC) (``NYSE'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed
amendments to its arbitration rules as described in Items I and II
below, which items have been prepared by the Exchange. On May 26, 2006,
the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change
(``Amendment No. 1'').\3\ 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\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange amended the filing to note
that the need to remove an arbitrator might arise not only for a
failure to disclose an item that should have been disclosed, but
also if a conflict arises after the commencement of the hearing. The
Exchange also amended the filing and the rule text to remove the
Director of Arbitration's discretion to limit the additional
information requested of an arbitrator.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The proposed rule change, as amended, consists of amendments to
Rule 611 concerning the disqualification of arbitrators.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of the proposed rule change is available on the NYSE's Web site
(http://www.NYSE.com), at the NYSE's principal office, and at the Commission's

Public Reference Room. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth
in Sections A, B and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    Once an arbitrator has taken the Oath of Arbitrators for a
particular case, NYSE rules do not currently provide for the Director
of Arbitration to remove an arbitrator from serving on that case. The
need for such action could arise if, for example, an item that should
have been disclosed by the arbitrator pursuant to Exchange rules had
inadvertently not been disclosed or a conflict arises after
commencement of the hearing. Historically, when this situation has
arisen, the remedy has been for the arbitrator to recuse himself or
herself. Nevertheless, the Exchange believes that it would be prudent
to give the Director of Arbitration the authority to remove an
arbitrator should a conflict come to the attention of the parties or
the Exchange that for whatever reason was not appropriately disclosed
pursuant to NYSE rules.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change, as amended, is
consistent with Section 6(b)(5) \4\ of the Act in that it promotes just
and equitable principles of trade by ensuring that members and member
organizations and the public have a fair and impartial

forum for the resolution of their disputes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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 written comments on
the proposed rule change.

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

    Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date 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 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, as amended, is consistent with the Act. We solicit specific
comment on whether the language of the proposed rule, as amended,
clearly indicates that conflicts arising after the commencement of the
hearing could give rise to removal of an arbitrator by the Director of
Arbitration. 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 e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-NYSE-2004-56 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2004-56. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all

written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the NYSE. All comments received will be posted
without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to
File Number SR-NYSE-2004-56 and should be submitted on or before August
28, 2006.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-12702 Filed 8-4-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


<!DOCTYPE html
     PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
     "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">

	<title>EPA Headquarters, Regional and State Contacts regarding the Acetochlor pesticide registration | Pesticides | US EPA</title>
	<meta name="DC.description" content="EPA Acetochlor Registration Information
             - EPA Headquarters, Regional and State Contacts" />
	<meta name="keywords" content="Office of Pesticide Programs, OPP, Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, pesticide, acetochlor, ARP, maps, soils, ground water, surface water, monitoring, pesticides, registration, partnership" />

	<meta name="DC.title" content="EPA Headquarters, Regional and State Contacts regarding the Acetochlor pesticide registration | Pesticides | US EPA" />
	<meta name="DC.subject" content="Office of Pesticide Programs, OPP, Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, pesticide, acetochlor, ARP, maps, soils, ground water, surface water, monitoring, pesticides, registration, partnership" />
	<meta name="DC.type" content="" />

	<meta name="DC.date.modified" content="2007-08-21" />
	<meta name="DC.date.created" content="" />
	<meta name="DC.date.reviewed" content="" />

	<meta name="DC.language" content="en" />
	<meta name="DC.Creator" content="US EPA, Office of Pesticide Programs" />
	<meta http-equiv="Content-Style-Type" content="text/css" />
	<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" />
	<link rel="schema.DC" href="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" />
	<link rel="meta" href="http://www.epa.gov/labels.rdf" type="application/rdf+xml" title="ICRA labels" />

	<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="print" href="http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/s/print.css" />

Jump to main content.

Pesticides: Regulating Pesticides

	<form id="EPAsearch" method="get" action="http://nlquery.epa.gov/epasearch/epasearch">

Recent Additions | Contact Us
			Search:
			<input type="hidden" name="fld" value="opp00001|regulating|antimicrobials|biopesticides|docket|factsheets|fees|fifra6a2|foia|foodfeed|international|pestlabels|registrationkit|reregistration|tolerance,
oppad001, oppbppd1|biopesticides,oppefed1|aceto|ecorisk_ders|studyprofile_templates, oppfead1|eds|harmonization|international|labeling, opphed01,opppmsd1,oppppls1,opprd001,oppsrrd1" />
			<input type="hidden" name="areaname" value="Pesticides: Regulating Pesticides" />
			<input type="hidden" name="areacontacts" value="http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/regulating/contacts.htm" />

			<input type="hidden" name="areasearchurl" value="http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/search.htm" />

			<input type="hidden" name="result_template" value="epafiles_default.xsl" />
 			<input type="hidden" name="filter" value="sample4filt.hts" />
			<input name="typeofsearch" id="EPAall" type="radio" value="epa"/>All EPA
			<input name="typeofsearch" id="Areaall" type="radio" value="area" checked="checked" />This Area
			<input name="querytext" id="searchbox" value="" />
		  <input name="submit" id="searchbutton" type="submit" value="Go" />

	</form>

You are here: EPA Home

Pesticides

Regulating Pesticides

Restricted & Canceled Uses

Acetochlor

Headquarters, Regional and State Contacts

EPA Headquarters, Regional and State Contacts regarding the Acetochlor
        pesticide registration

EPA Headquarters Contact(s)

Don Stubbs      Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>
MailCode 7505C

401 M. St., S.W.
Washington, D.C.  20460

EPA Regional Contact(s)

Region 9

Ed Masters        Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>

EPA State Contact(s)

Illinois

Tom Walker

Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>

Bureau of Environmental Programs

Il Dept. of Agriculture

P.O. Box 19281

Springfield, IL 62794-9281

Indiana

Dave Scott

Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>

Indiana State Chemist

Purdue University

1154 Biochemistry Building

West Lafayette, IN  47907-1154

Iowa

Jim Ellerhoff

Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>

Pesticide Bureau

Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship

Wallace Building

Des Moines, IA  50319-0051

Kansas

Dale Lambley

Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>

Kansas Department of Agriculture

Director of Plant Health

901 S. Campus Ave.

Topeka, KS  66612-1281

Minnesota

John Hines

Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>

Minnesota Department of Agriculture

Agronomy  and Plant Protection Division

90 West Plato Blvd., 4th floor

St. Paul, MN  55107

Missouri

Paul Andre

Bureau of Pesticide Control

Missouri Department of Agriculture

P.O. Box 630

Jefferson City, MO 65102

Nebraska

Jamie Green

Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>

Nebraska Dept. of Agriculture

P.O. Box 94756

Lincoln, NE 68509

Ohio

Robert Wulfhorst

Division of Plant Industry

OH Department of Agriculture

8995 East Main Street

Reynoldsburg, OH  43068-3399

Pennsylvania

Earl Haas

Division of Agronomic Services

PA Department of Agriculture

Bureau of Plant Industry

2301 North Cameron Street

Harrisburg, PA  17110-9408

Wisconsin

Ned Zuelsdorff

Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>

Bureau of Agrichemical Management

WI Dept. of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection

P.O. Box 8911

Madison, WI  53705-8911

Publications | Glossary | A-Z
    Index | Jobs

Local Navigation

Pesticides Home

Regulating Pesticides Home

Registration

Reevaulation: Pesticide Review

Pesticide-Producing Establishments

Laws and Regulations

International Issues

Adverse Effects Reporting

Storage & Disposal

Restricted & Canceled  Uses

Pesticide Tolerances

Registration Information Sources

EPA Home

Privacy and Security Notice

Contact Us

Jump to main content.


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 86 (Wednesday, May 4, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 26851]
[FR Doc No: 2016-10406]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release Nos. 33-10074; 34-77743; File No. 265-27]

SEC Advisory Committee on Small and Emerging Companies

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange Commission Advisory Committee on
Small and Emerging Companies is providing notice that it will hold a
public meeting on Wednesday, May 18, 2016, in Multi-Purpose Room LL-006
at the Commission's headquarters, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC. The
meeting will begin at 9:30 a.m. (EDT) and will be open to the public.
The meeting will be webcast on the Commission's Web site at
www.sec.gov. Persons needing special accommodations to take part
because of a disability should notify the contact person listed below.
The public is invited to submit written statements to the Committee.
The agenda for the meeting includes matters relating to rules and
regulations affecting small and emerging companies under the federal
securities laws.

DATES: The public meeting will be held on Wednesday, May 18, 2016.
Written statements should be received on or before May 16, 2016.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Commission's headquarters,
100 F Street NE., Washington, DC. Written statements may be submitted
by any of the following methods:

Electronic Statements

     Use the Commission's Internet submission form (http://www.sec.gov/info/smallbus/acsec.shtml); or
     Send an email message to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please
include File Number 265-27 on the subject line; or

Paper Statements

     Send paper statements to Brent J. Fields, Federal Advisory
Committee Management Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F
Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File No. 265-27. This file number
should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help us
process and review your statement more efficiently, please use only one
method. The Commission will post all statements on the Advisory
Committee's Web site (http://www.sec.gov/spotlight/acsec-spotlight.shtml).
    Statements also will be available for Web site viewing and printing
in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. All statements received will be posted without
change; we do not edit personal identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julie Z. Davis, Senior Special
Counsel, at<PHONE_NUMBER>, Office of Small Business Policy, Division
of Corporation Finance, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F
Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-3628.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with Section 10(a) of the
Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C.--App. 1, and the regulations
thereunder, Keith Higgins, Designated Federal Officer of the Committee,
has ordered publication of this notice.

    Dated: April 29, 2016.
Brent J. Fields,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2016-10406 Filed 5-3-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 12 (Thursday, January 19, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 6216-6218]
[FR Doc No: 2017-00446]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Bureau of Industry and Security

15 CFR Parts 740, 748, and 762

[Docket No. 161230999-7013-01]
RIN 0694-AH11

Support Document Requirements With Respect to Hong Kong

AGENCY: Bureau of Industry and Security, Commerce.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rule requires persons intending to export or reexport to
Hong Kong any item subject to the Export Administration Regulations
(EAR) and controlled on the Commerce Control List (CCL) for national
security (NS), missile technology (MT), nuclear nonproliferation (NP
column 1), or chemical and biological weapons (CB) reasons to obtain,
prior to such export or reexport, a copy of a Hong Kong import license
or a written statement from the Hong Kong government that such a
license is not required.
    This rule also requires persons intending to reexport from Hong
Kong any item subject to the EAR and controlled for NS, MT, NP column
1, or CB reasons to obtain a Hong Kong export license or a statement
from the Hong Kong government that such a license is not required.

DATES: The rule is effective April 19, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tracey Patts, Foreign Policy Division,
Bureau of Industry and Security, Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region
maintains an import and export control system. The ``Import and Export
(Strategic Commodities) Regulations'' are an integral part of that
system. Schedules in those regulations identify articles that may not
be imported or exported without a license from Hong Kong's Director-
General of Trade and Industry. Those schedules and much of the CCL are
based on the control lists published by four multilateral export
control regimes. Export control classification number (ECCN) entries on
the CCL identify one or more reason(s) for which listed items are
controlled. Four of these reasons for control are based on the four
multilateral export control regimes, as follows: The Wassenaar
Arrangement on Export Controls for Conventional Arms and Dual-Use Goods
and Technologies (NS on the CCL), the Missile Technology Control Regime
(MT on the CCL), the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NP column 1 on the CCL),
and the Australia Group (CB on the CCL). Because the Hong Kong
schedules and most of the CCL are developed from these same four
sources, large portions of both sets of documents cover the same items.
    The government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region uses
information from the import licenses that it issues to identify
articles that require an export license. This rule imposes new support
documentation requirements affecting items subject to the EAR that are
exported or reexported to Hong Kong or are reexported from Hong Kong.
BIS is taking this action to provide greater assurance that U.S. origin
items that are subject to the multilateral control regimes noted above
will be properly authorized by the United States to their final
destination, even when those items first pass through Hong Kong. This
rule does not impose any new license requirements.

Exports and Reexports to Hong Kong

    This rule requires exporters and reexporters using a BIS license or
a license exception to export or reexport to Hong Kong items controlled
for NS, MT, NP column 1, or CB reasons to obtain certain documents that
verify the items' status under the Hong Kong Import and Export
(Strategic Commodities) Regulations. The exporter or reexporter must
obtain from its client or consignee a copy of a valid import license
issued to the Hong Kong importer by the Hong Kong government
authorizing import of the item(s) to be shipped to Hong Kong, or a copy
of a written statement issued by the Hong Kong government stating that
no import license is required to import the item(s) into Hong Kong. The
exporter or reexporter must have the copies in its possession, and any
Hong Kong import license must not have expired at the time of the
export or reexport to Hong Kong. For purposes of this requirement, a
written statement issued by the Hong Kong government includes either a
written communication to a license applicant informing the applicant
that the item does not require a license or a statement available to
the general public (including a statement on a Web site by the Hong
Kong government) that a license is not required for the item.

Reexports From Hong Kong

    This rule also requires reexporters in Hong Kong intending to
reexport from Hong Kong items subject to the EAR that are controlled
for NS, MT, NP column 1, or CB reasons to obtain from the Hong Kong
government a license authorizing export from Hong Kong of the items, or
a copy of a written statement issued by the Hong Kong government
stating that no export license is required from Hong Kong to export the
items. If a Hong Kong license is issued, the reexport must be in
accordance with the terms of that license and must be completed during
the validity period of the Hong Kong-issued export license. For
purposes of this requirement, a written statement issued by the Hong
Kong government includes a written communication to a license applicant
informing the applicant that the item does not require a license or a
statement available to the general public (including a statement on a
Web site by the Hong Kong government) that a license is not required
for the item.

Export Administration Act

    Since August 21, 2001, the Export Administration Act of 1979, as
amended, has been in lapse. However, the President, through Executive
Order 13222 of August 17, 2001, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783 (2002), as
amended by Executive Order 13637 of March 8, 2013, 78 FR 16129 (March
13, 2013), and as extended by the Notice of August 4, 2016, 81 FR 52587
(August 8, 2016), has continued the EAR in effect under the
International Emergency Economic Powers Act. BIS continues to carry out
the provisions of the Export Administration Act, as appropriate and to
the extent permitted by law, pursuant to Executive Order 13222 as
amended by Executive Order 13637.

Rulemaking Requirements

    1. Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 direct agencies to assess all
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). This rule
has been determined to be not significant for purposes of Executive
Order 12866.
    2. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person is
required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a penalty
for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq.) (PRA), unless that collection of information displays a currently
valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Control Number. This rule
includes an expansion of an existing collection of information approved

under OMB control number 0694-0093--Import Certificate and End-User
Certificate, for which the current burden estimates are 5,872 responses
and 1,618 hours annually. BIS expects that this rule will increase the
number of transactions for which exporters and reexporters will have to
acquire support documentation by about 12,000 transactions annually,
with a corresponding increase in the number of burden hours. Send
comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this
collections of information, including suggestions for reducing the
burden, to Jasmeet K. Seehra, Office of Management and Budget, by email
at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by fax to<PHONE_NUMBER> and to Hillary Hess,
BIS, at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. This rule does not contain policies with Federalism implications
as that term is defined under Executive Order 13132.
    4. The provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C.
553) requiring notice of proposed rulemaking, the opportunity for
public participation, and a 30-day delay in effective date, are
inapplicable because this regulation involves a military and foreign
affairs function of the United States (5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1)). Therefore,
we are issuing this action as a final rule. This action will foster
effective administration of and compliance with the export control
regulations of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region with respect
to U.S.-origin items. Those regulations apply to items that are listed
on the control lists of multilateral export control regimes of which
the United States is a member. Effective control over such items
imported into Hong Kong by the government of the Hong Kong Special
Administrative Region serves the United States' national security and
foreign policy interests directly, because many of these items are
controlled due to their national security significance or their
potential to be used in activities that would promote proliferation of
weapons of mass destruction or in regional destabilizing activities.
    This rule also enhances the effectiveness of the multilateral
control regimes, which serves United States interests in two ways.
First, widespread consistent implementation of those regime-based
export controls promotes peace and stability throughout the world
generally. Second, this rule signals to other nations, regime member
states and non-members alike, the United States' determination that
distribution of U.S. origin items throughout the world will be in
accordance with its regime commitments.
    Moreover, BIS expects that in nearly all instances, this rule
requires only that a party in Hong Kong obtain a license that is
already required under Hong Kong law. In those instances, no new action
is required by persons reexporting from Hong Kong and the only new
action with respect to exports and reexports to Hong Kong is for the
person in Hong Kong to send a copy of the license to its supplier. In
the limited instances where the CCL covers items with one or more of
the reasons for control noted above that are not listed on the Hong
Kong control, such as when the Hong Kong Government and the United
States Government update their control lists in response the changes in
the multilateral export control regime lists at different times, the
party in Hong Kong will have to obtain a written statement from the
Hong Kong Government that a Hong Kong license is not required. However,
the rule gives the party in Hong Kong several options for providing the
required information. Various documents, including the Hong Kong
government's specific response to a license application informing the
applicant that a license is not required and more general statements
downloaded from a Hong Kong Government Web site, will be adequate to
fulfill this requirement. One document may be used for multiple
shipments as long as the document remains accurate.
    Despite the importance of prompt publication and effectiveness to
our foreign policy goals as noted above, BIS recognizes that some
exporters and reexporters will need time to obtain the required
documentation from their customers for all transactions subject to this
rule. Therefore, the effective date of this final rule is ninety days
after publication.

List of Subjects

15 CFR Parts 740 and 748

    Administrative practice and procedure, Exports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

15 CFR Part 762

    Administrative practice and procedure, Business and industry,
Confidential business information, Exports, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, parts 740, 742, and 762
of the Export Administration Regulations (15 CFR parts 730 through 774)
are amended as follows:

PART 740--LICENSE EXCEPTIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 740 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority: 50 U.S.C. 4601 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; 22
U.S.C. 7201 et seq.; E.O. 13026, 61 FR 58767, 3 CFR, 1996 Comp., p.
228; E.O. 13222, 66 FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; Notice of
August 4, 2016, 81 FR 52587 (August 8, 2016).

0
2. In Sec.  740.2, add paragraphs (a)(19) and (20) to read as follows:

Sec.  740.2  Restrictions on all License Exceptions.

    (a) * * *
    (19) The exporter or reexporter to Hong Kong of any item subject to
the EAR and controlled on the CCL for NS, MT, NP Column 1, or CB
reasons has not received one of the following with respect to the item:
    (i) A copy of an import license issued to the Hong Kong importer by
the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, pursuant
to the Hong Kong Import and Export (Strategic Commodities) Regulations,
that covers all items to be exported or reexported pursuant to that
license exception for which a Hong Kong import license is required and
that is valid on the date of the export or reexport that is subject to
the EAR; or
    (ii) A copy of a written statement issued by the Government of the
Hong Kong Special Administrative Region that no import license is
required to import into Hong Kong the item(s) to be exported or
reexported. The statement may have been issued directly to the Hong
Kong importer or it may be a written statement available to the general
public. The statement may be used for more than one export or reexport
to Hong Kong so long as it remains an accurate statement of Hong Kong
law.
    (20) The reexporter from Hong Kong of any item subject to the EAR
controlled on the CCL for NS, MT, NP column 1, or CB reasons has not
received one of the following with respect to the item:
    (i) An export license issued by the Government of the Hong Kong
Special Administrative Region, pursuant to the Hong Kong Import and
Export (Strategic Commodities) Regulations, that covers all items to be
reexported pursuant to that license exception for which a Hong Kong
export license is required and that is valid on the date of the
reexport that is subject to the EAR; or
    (ii) A copy of a written statement issued by the Government of the
Hong Kong Special Administrative Region that no Hong Kong export
license is required for the item(s) to be rexported.

The statement may have been issued directly to the Hong Kong reexporter
or it may be a written statement available to the general public. The
statement may be used for more than one reexport from Hong Kong so long
as it remains an accurate statement of Hong Kong law.

PART 748--APPLICATIONS (CLASSIFICATION, ADVISORY, AND LICENSE) AND
DOCUMENTATION

0
3. The authority citation for part 748 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority: 50 U.S.C. 4601 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; E.O.
13026, 61 FR 58767, 3 CFR, 1996 Comp., p. 228; E.O. 13222, 66 FR
44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; Notice of August 4, 2016, 81 FR
52587 (August 8, 2016).

0
4. 748.9(b) is amended by revising the section heading, revising
paragraph (b) and all notes to paragraph (b), and adding two sentences
to the end paragraph of (e)(1), to read as follows:

Sec.  748.9  Support documents for evaluation of foreign parties in
license applications and/or for promoting compliance with license
requirements.

* * * * *
    (b) Requirements to obtain support documents for license
applications. Unless an exception in paragraph (c) of this section
applies, a support document is required for certain license
applications for:
    (1) The People's Republic of China (PRC) other than the Hong Kong
Special Administrative Region (see Sec. Sec.  748.10 and 748.11(a)(2));
    (2) ``600 Series Major Defense Equipment'' (see Sec.  748.11);
    (3) Firearms and related commodities to member countries of the
Organization of American States (see Sec.  748.12); and
    (4) The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's
Republic of China (see Sec.  748.13).

    Note 1 to Paragraph (b): On a case-by-case basis, BIS may
require license applicants to obtain a support document for any
license application.

    Note 2 to Paragraph (b): For End-Use Certificate requirements
under the Chemical Weapons Convention, see Sec.  745.2 of the EAR.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (1) * * * The documents issued by the Government of the Hong Kong
Special Administrative region that are required pursuant to Sec.
748.13 are not used to evaluate license applications. They must be
obtained before shipment and need not be obtained before submitting a
license application.
* * * * *

0
5. Redesignate Sec.  748.13 as Sec.  748.14 and add new Sec.  748.13 to
read as follows:

Sec.  748.13  Hong Kong import and export licenses.

    (a) Requirement to obtain the document--(1) Exports and reexports
to Hong Kong. An exporter or reexporter must obtain the documents
described in paragraph (a)(1)(i) or (a)(1)(ii) of this section before
using a license issued by BIS to export or reexport to Hong Kong any
item subject to the EAR and controlled on the CCL for NS, MT, NP column
1, or CB reasons. Collectively, the documents issued by Hong Kong must
cover all of the items to be exported or reexported pursuant to a
license.
    (i) A copy of an import license issued to the Hong Kong importer by
the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, pursuant
to the Hong Kong Import and Export (Strategic Commodities) Regulations,
that covers the items to be exported or reexported pursuant to that BIS
license for which a Hong Kong import license is required and that is
valid on the date of the export or reexport that is subject to the EAR;
or
    (ii) A copy of a written statement issued by the Government of the
Hong Kong Special Administrative Region that no import license is
required to import into Hong Kong the item(s) to be exported or
reexported to Hong Kong. The statement may have been issued directly to
the Hong Kong importer or it may be a written statement available to
the general public. The statement may be used for more than one export
or reexport to Hong Kong so long as it remains an accurate statement of
Hong Kong law.
    (2) Reexports from Hong Kong. No license issued by BIS may be used
to reexport from Hong Kong any item subject to the EAR controlled on
the CCL for NS, MT, NP column 1, and/or CB reasons unless the
reexporter has received either:
    (i) An export license issued by the Government of the Hong Kong
Special Administrative Region, pursuant to the Hong Kong Import and
Export (Strategic Commodities) Regulations, that covers all items to be
rexported pursuant to that BIS license for which a Hong Kong export
license is required and that is valid on the date of the reexport that
is subject to the EAR; or
    (ii) A copy of a written statement issued by the Government of the
Hong Kong Special Administrative Region that no export license is
required from Hong Kong for the item(s) to be reexported. The statement
may have been issued directly to the Hong Kong reexporter or it may be
a written statement available to the general public. The statement may
be used for more than one reexport from Hong Kong so long as it remains
an accurate statement of Hong Kong law.
    (b) Recordkeeping. The documents required to be obtained by
paragraph (a) of this section must be retained and made available to
the U.S. Government upon request in accordance with part 762 of the
EAR.

PART 762--RECORDKEEPING

0
6. The authority citation for part 762 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 50 U.S.C. 4601 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; E.O.
13222, 66 FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; Notice of August 4,
2016, 81 FR 52587 (August 8, 2016).

0
7. In Sec.  762.2 remove the word ``and'' from the end of paragraph
(b)(52); remove the period from the end of paragraph (b)(53) and add in
its place a semicolon followed by the word ``and''; add paragraph
(b)(54) to read as follows:

Sec.  762.2  Records to be retained.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (54) Sec.  748.13, Certain Hong Kong import and export licenses.
* * * * *

    Dated: January 6, 2017.
Kevin J. Wolf,
Assistant Secretary for Export Admiration.
[FR Doc. 2017-00446 Filed 1-18-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-33-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 248 (Monday, December 28, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 84275-84278]
[FR Doc No: 2020-28440]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2020-1165; Project Identifier 2019-SW-027-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for certain Airbus Helicopters Model SA341G and SA342J helicopters.
This proposed AD was prompted by the determination that a new life
limit was necessary for certain tail rotor blades (TRBs). This proposed
AD would require replacing certain TRBs, re-identifying certain TRBs,
and repairing certain other TRBs, as specified in a European Union
Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD, which is proposed for incorporation
by reference. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by February
11, 2021.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    For material that will be incorporated by reference (IBR) in this
AD, contact the EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany;
telephone +49 221 89990 000; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet
www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this IBR material on the EASA website
at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view this IBR material at the
FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood
Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also
available in the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-
1165.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-
1165; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this NPRM, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for Docket Operations is listed above. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Blaine Williams, Aerospace Engineer,
Los Angeles ACO Branch, 3960 Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, California
90712; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2020-1165; Project Identifier
2019-SW-027-AD'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposal because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact received about this proposal.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to
Blaine Williams, Aerospace Engineer, Los Angeles ACO Branch, 3960
Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, California 90712; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Any commentary that the FAA receives
that is not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public
docket for this rulemaking.

Discussion

    The EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2019-0034, dated February 14, 2019
(EASA AD 2019-0034) (also referred to as the Mandatory Continuing
Airworthiness Information, or the MCAI), to correct an unsafe condition
for all Airbus Helicopters Model SA341G and SA342J helicopters.
    This proposed AD was prompted by the determination that a new life
limit was necessary for TRBs that were manufactured without a new
process that affects the structural characteristics. The FAA is
proposing this AD to address TRBs that might break, resulting in loss
of tail rotor control and consequent loss of control of the helicopter.
See the MCAI for additional background information.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2019-0034 describes procedures for replacing TRBs having
certain part numbers, re-identifying TRBs having a certain part number
and certain serial numbers, and repairing TRBs that have been reworked/
repaired/modified before being re-identified.
    This material is reasonably available because the interested
parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by
the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to the bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, the FAA
has been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI
referenced above. The FAA is proposing this AD because the FAA
evaluated all the relevant information and determined the unsafe
condition described previously is likely to exist or develop in other
products of the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in EASA AD 2019-0034, described previously, as incorporated by
reference, except for any differences identified as exceptions in the
regulatory text of this proposed AD.

Explanation of Required Compliance Information

    In the FAA's ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the AD
process, the FAA initially worked with Airbus and EASA to develop a
process to use certain EASA ADs as the primary source of information
for compliance with requirements for corresponding FAA ADs. The FAA has
since coordinated with other manufacturers and civil aviation
authorities (CAAs) to use this process. As a result, EASA AD 2019-0034
will be incorporated by reference in the FAA final rule. This proposed
AD would, therefore, require compliance with EASA AD 2019-0034 in its
entirety, through that incorporation, except for any differences
identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this proposed AD.
Using common terms that are the same as the heading of a particular
section in the EASA AD does not mean that operators need comply only
with that section. For example, where the AD requirement refers to
``all required actions and compliance times,'' compliance with this AD
requirement is not limited to the section titled ``Required Action(s)
and Compliance Time(s)'' in the EASA AD. Service information specified
in EASA AD 2019-0034 that is required for compliance with EASA AD 2019-
0034 will be available on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov
by searching for and locating Docket No.

FAA-2020-1165 after the FAA final rule is published.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this proposed AD affects 20 helicopters of
U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with
this proposed AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
                          Labor cost                              Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 work-hour x $85 per hour = $85.............................          $3,900           $3,985          $79,700
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements.
Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight
of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for
practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary
for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to
exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13   [Amended]

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

Airbus Helicopters: Docket No. FAA-2020-1165; Project Identifier
2019-SW-027-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments by February 11, 2021.

(b) Affected Airworthiness Directives (ADs)

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus Helicopters Model SA341G and SA342J
helicopters, certificated in any category, equipped with any tail
rotor blade (TRB) specified in paragraph (c)(1) or (2) of this AD.
    (1) An affected part as defined in European Union Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2019-0034, dated February 14, 2019 (EASA AD
2019-0034).
    (2) A TRB having part number (P/N) 341A335101.01, P/N
341A335130.05, or P/N 341A335130.06.

(d) Subject

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

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by the determination that a new life limit
was necessary for TRBs that were manufactured without a new process
that affects the structural characteristics. The FAA is issuing this
AD to address TRBs that might break, resulting in loss of tail rotor
control and consequent loss of control of the helicopter.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Requirements

    Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, EASA AD 2019-0034.

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2019-0034

    (1) Where EASA AD 2019-0034 refers to its effective date, this
AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (2) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2019-0034 does not apply
to this AD.
    (3) Where EASA AD 2019-0034 refers to flight hours (FH), this AD
requires using hours time-in-service.
    (4) Where paragraph (4) of EASA AD 2019-0034 specifies to
contact the manufacturer, for this AD, repair using a method
approved by the Manager, Strategic Policy Rotorcraft Section, FAA.
For a repair method to be approved by the Manager, Strategic Policy
Rotorcraft Section, as required by this paragraph, the Manager's
approval letter must specifically refer to this AD.
    (5) Where paragraph (5) of EASA AD 2019-0034 specifies it must
be determined that the rework/repair/modification is valid for part
number 341A335130.06, for this AD, rework/repair/modification of an
affected part is prohibited.

(i) Special Flight Permit

    Special flight permits, as described in 14 CFR 21.197 and
21.199, are not allowed.

(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    The Manager, Strategic Policy Rotorcraft Section, FAA, may
approve AMOCs for this AD. Send your proposal to: Manager, Strategic
Policy Rotorcraft Section, FAA, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX
76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(k) Related Information

    (1) For EASA AD 2019-0034, contact the EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-
Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 89990 000; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this
EASA AD on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may
view this material at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel,
Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX
76177. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. This material may be found in the AD docket
on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2020-1165.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Blaine Williams,
Aerospace Engineer, Los Angeles ACO Branch, 3960 Paramount Blvd.,
Lakewood, California 90712; telephone

(562) 627-5371; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Issued on December 17, 2020.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2020-28440 Filed 12-23-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P