[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 232 (Friday, December 2, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 86960-86966]
[FR Doc No: 2016-29005]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0560; FRL-9954-63]

Bicyclopyrone; Pesticide Tolerances

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
bicyclopyrone in or on wheat and barley. Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC.
requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FFDCA).

DATES: This regulation is effective December 2, 2016. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before January 31, 2017,
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-2015-0560, 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 Goodis, Registration Division
(7505P), 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-2015-0560 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
January 31, 2017. 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-2015-0560, 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 21, 2015 (80 FR 63731) (FRL-
9935-29), 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
5F8374) by Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC., P.O. Box 18300, Greensboro,
NC 27419. The petition requested that 40 CFR part 180.682 be amended by
establishing tolerances for residues of the herbicide, bicyclopyrone:
4-hydroxy-3-{2-[(2-methoxyethoxy) methyl{time} -6-(trifluoromethyl)-3-
pyridylcarbonyl{time}  bicyclo oct-3-en-2-one, in or on the raw
agricultural commodities: Barley, bran at 0.15 parts per million (ppm);
barley, germ at 0.10 ppm; barley, grain, at 0.07 ppm; barley, hay at
0.3 ppm; barley, straw at 0.50 ppm; wheat, aspirated grain fractions at
0.50 ppm; wheat, bran at 0.15 ppm; wheat, forage at 0.50 ppm; wheat,
germ at 0.10 ppm; wheat, grain, at 0.04 ppm; wheat, hay at 0.9 ppm; and
wheat, straw at 0.50 ppm. That document referenced a summary of the
petition prepared by Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC., the registrant,
which is available in the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. There
were no comments received in response to the notice of filing.
    Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA has
revised the proposed tolerances to wheat, forage at 0.40 ppm; wheat,
hay at 0.80 ppm; wheat, bran at 0.07 ppm; grain, aspirated fractions at
0.30 ppm; and barley, straw at 0.40 ppm. EPA has increased the existing
tolerances to cattle, meat byproducts at 2.0 ppm; goat, meat byproducts
at 2.0 ppm; sheep, meat byproducts at 2.0 ppm; horse, meat byproducts;
at 2.0 ppm; and hog, meat byproducts at 0.40 ppm. EPA has determined
that tolerances are not needed to be established for barley, germ and
wheat, germ. The reason for these changes are explained in Unit IV.C.

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 bicyclopyrone including
exposure resulting from the tolerances established by this action.
EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with bicyclopyrone
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.
    The effects of bicyclopyrone are indicative of inhibition of 4-
hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (HPPD). Plasma tyrosine levels were
consistently elevated in rats, rabbits, and dogs (levels in mice were
not tested). Consistent with these elevated tyrosine levels, ocular
effects (corneal opacity, keratitis) were observed for subchronic and
chronic durations through the oral and dermal routes in rats, which was
the most sensitive species tested (minor instances in dogs). There were
also increased incidences of thyroid follicular hyperplasia and a
chronic progressive nephropathy.
    While minor instances of ocular effects were observed in dogs,
different toxicological effects were generally observed. For subchronic
oral exposure, clinical signs (moderate hypoactivity, slightly unsteady
gait, increased heart rate, regurgitation, and vomiting) were observed,
and clinical pathological indicators of toxicity occurred in the eye

and the thymus. Following chronic exposure, there was a dose-dependent
increase in chromatolysis and swelling of selected neurons in the
dorsal root ganglia, and degeneration of nerve fibers in the spinal
nerve roots in both sexes. In one female dog at the high dose, corneal
opacity and light sensitivity were observed.
    Across the database, there were decreased absolute body weights
(the only finding in mice for any duration) and food consumption. There
were no signs of immunotoxicity or neurotoxicity in rodents.
    Bicyclopyrone treatment resulted in developmental toxicity in both
rats and rabbits, and there was an increased quantitative fetal
susceptibility in both species tested. In rats, maternal toxicity was
not observed up to 1,000 milligram/kilogram/day (mg/kg/day). Fetal
effects occurred at all doses (>=100 mg/kg/day), and manifested as
skeletal variations (increased incidences of full or rudimentary
supernumerary ribs, pelvic girdle malpositioned caudal, costal
cartilage 11 long). In New Zealand White rabbits, maternal effects
consisted of mortality/moribundity in conjunction with minimal food
consumption at 200 mg/kg/day. Fetal effects once again occurred at all
doses tested (>=10 mg/kg/day). The sole fetal effect at the lowest dose
tested was the appearance of the 27th presacral vertebrae. There were
two studies in Himalayan rabbits. In both studies, maternal effects
consisted of macroscopic findings in the stomach wall and an increased
incidence of post-implantation loss at the 250 mg/kg/day dose level. In
the first study, fetal effects occurred starting at 50 mg/kg/day and
consisted of skeletal variations (increased incidence of the 27th
prepelvic vertebra and malpositioned pelvic girdle). In the second
study, the increased quantitative fetal susceptibility was not observed
due to a change in the dose selection. Fetal effects occurred at 250
mg/kg/day and consisted of external, visceral, and skeletal
abnormalities, and visceral variations, skeletal, bone and cartilage
variations. In total, the effects in these studies are consistent with
effects of other chemicals in this class.
    In the two-generation reproductive study in rats, ocular toxicity
occurred in parents and offspring and there was no increased offspring
susceptibility of any kind. Reproductive effects included changes in
sperm parameters, and a decrease of precoital interval.
    To determine the mechanism for the thyroid hyperplasia observed in
the chronic/carcinogenicity study in rats, two mode-of-action studies
were performed. In the in vitro study, bicyclopyrone was negative for
thyroid peroxidase inhibition. The results from the in vivo study
suggested that the observed thyroid hyperplasia was the result of
increased metabolism of thyroid hormones indicated by: (1) Decreased
plasma T3 and T4 levels, (2) increased thyroid follicular cell
hypertrophy, (3) increased liver weights associated, and (4) increased
hepatocellular centrilobular hypertrophy and increased hepatic uridine
diphosphate glucuronyl transferase (UDPGT) activities. Bicyclopyrone is
categorized as having low acute lethality via all routes of
administration. Bicyclopyrone produces minimal eye irritation and mild
acute inhalation toxicity.
    Two adequate carcinogenicity studies were submitted. One study
conducted on rats showed the presence of rare ocular tumors in male
rats only. The corneal tumors observed in male rats are (1) treatment
related, (2) found at doses that were considered to be adequate and not
excessive for assessing carcinogenicity, (3) there are no concerns for
mutagenicity or genotoxicity, and (4) are supported by structure-
activity relationship (SAR) data for another HPPD inhibitor,
tembotrione. Another study conducted on mice showed lung tumors, which
are not considered treatment related. Because the tumors are found only
in one species and only in males, consistent with the Agency guidelines
for carcinogen risk assessment, the Agency has classified bicyclopyrone
as ``suggestive evidence of cancer'' and has determined that
quantification of bicyclopyrone's carcinogenic potential is not
required. A non-linear approach (i.e., reference dose (RfD)) will
adequately protect for all chronic toxicity, including carcinogenicity
that could result from exposure to bicyclopyrone. Using EPA's non-
linear approach, the 1000X combined uncertainty factor used to
calculate the chronic RfD/chronic population-adjusted dose for the
chronic dietary assessment, generates a dose which is 10,000-fold lower
than the dose at which the ocular tumors were not observed and is thus
protective of their potential formation.
    Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by bicyclopyrone as well as the no-observed-
adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-
level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at http://www.regulations.gov in document titled ``Bicyclopyrone: Human Health
Risk Assessment for the Section 3 Registration Action on Cereals (Wheat
and Barley)'' at pp. 29-34 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0560.

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 the NOAEL and the LOAEL are identified.
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 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
bicyclopyrone used for human risk assessment is discussed in Unit III.
B of the final rule published in the Federal Register of April 23, 2015
(80 FR 22648) (FRL-9926-66).

C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to bicyclopyrone, EPA considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all existing bicyclopyrone
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.682. EPA assessed dietary exposures from
bicyclopyrone in food as follows:
    i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk
assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological
study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring
as a result of a 1-day or single exposure. Such effects were identified
for bicyclopyrone. In estimating acute dietary exposure, EPA used food
consumption information from the United States Department of
Agriculture (USDA) 2003-2008 Nationwide Continuing Surveys of Food
Intake by Individuals (CSFII). The acute dietary analysis was conducted
for

bicyclopyrone assuming tolerance level residues, default processing
factors, and 100% crop treatment (PCT) information.
    ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the USDA 2003-2008
CSFII. The chronic dietary exposure assessment was conducted for
bicyclopyrone assuming average field trial residues for crops, average
empirical processing factors, anticipated residues for livestock
commodities, and PCT estimates for some commodities.
    iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
determined that a separate cancer exposure assessment does not need to
be conducted.
    iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) information.
Section 408(b)(2)(E) of FFDCA authorizes EPA to use available data and
information on the anticipated residue levels of pesticide residues in
food and the actual levels of pesticide residues that have been
measured in food. If EPA relies on such information, EPA must require
pursuant to FFDCA section 408(f)(1) that data be provided 5 years after
the tolerance is established, modified, or left in effect,
demonstrating that the levels in food are not above the levels
anticipated. For the present action, EPA will issue such data call-ins
as are required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(E) and authorized under
FFDCA section 408(f)(1). Data will be required to be submitted no later
than 5 years from the date of issuance of these tolerances.
    Section 408(b)(2)(F) of FFDCA states that the Agency may use data
on the actual percent of food treated for assessing chronic dietary
risk only if:
     Condition A: The data used are reliable and provide a
valid basis to show what percentage of the food derived from such crop
is likely to contain the pesticide residue.
     Condition B: The exposure estimate does not underestimate
exposure for any significant subpopulation group.
     Condition C: Data are available on pesticide use and food
consumption in a particular area, the exposure estimate does not
understate exposure for the population in such area.
    In addition, the Agency must provide for periodic evaluation of any
estimates used. To provide for the periodic evaluation of the estimate
of PCT as required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(F), EPA may require
registrants to submit data on PCT.
    The Agency estimated the PCT for existing uses as follows: The
chronic analysis incorporated the following PCT estimates: Field corn,
40% and sweet/popcorn, 35%. The PCT for livestock commodities is based
on the PCT estimate value for the livestock feed item used in the
dietary burden with the highest PCT (field corn, 40%).
    In most cases, EPA uses available data from United States
Department of Agriculture/National Agricultural Statistics Service
(USDA/NASS), proprietary market surveys, and the National Pesticide Use
Database for the chemical/crop combination for the most recent 6-7
years. EPA uses an average PCT for chronic dietary risk analysis. The
average PCT figure for each existing use is derived by combining
available public and private market survey data for that use, averaging
across all observations, and rounding to the nearest 5%, except for
those situations in which the average PCT is less than one. In those
cases, 1% is used as the average PCT and 2.5% is used as the maximum
PCT. EPA uses a maximum PCT for acute dietary risk analysis. The
maximum PCT figure is the highest observed maximum value reported
within the recent 6 years of available public and private market survey
data for the existing use and rounded up to the nearest multiple of 5%.
    The Agency estimated the PCT for new uses as follows: The chronic
analysis incorporated the following PCT estimates: Barley, 5% and
wheat, 1%.
    The Agency believes that the three conditions discussed in Unit
III.C.1.iv. have been met. With respect to Condition A, PCT estimates
are derived from Federal and private market survey data, which are
reliable and have a valid basis. The Agency is reasonably certain that
the percentage of the food treated is not likely to be an
underestimation. As to Conditions B and C, regional consumption
information and consumption information for significant subpopulations
is taken into account through EPA's computer-based model for evaluating
the exposure of significant subpopulations including several regional
groups. Use of this consumption information in EPA's risk assessment
process ensures that EPA's exposure estimate does not understate
exposure for any significant subpopulation group and allows the Agency
to be reasonably certain that no regional population is exposed to
residue levels higher than those estimated by the Agency. Other than
the data available through national food consumption surveys, EPA does
not have available reliable information on the regional consumption of
food to which bicyclopyrone may be applied in a particular area.
    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for bicyclopyrone in drinking water. These simulation models
take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of bicyclopyrone. Further information regarding EPA
drinking water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be
found at http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
    The Surface Water Concentration Calculator (SWCC) computer model
was used to generate surface water Estimated Drinking Water
Concentrations (EDWCs), while the Pesticide Root Zone Model for
Groundwater (PRZM-GW) and the Screening Concentration in Ground Water
(SCI-GROW) models were used to generate groundwater EDWCs. The maximum
acute, chronic, and cancer surface water EDWCs associated with
bicyclopyrone use on wheat and barley were 3.43, 1.02, and 0.46 parts
per billion (ppb), respectively. For groundwater sources of drinking
water, the maximum acute, chronic and cancer EDWCs of bicyclopyrone in
shallow groundwater from PRZM-GW were 4.82, 4.2, and 2.1 ppb,
respectively. EDWCs of 4.82 ppb and 4.2 ppb were used in the acute and
chronic analyses, respectively.
    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). Bicyclopyrone is not
registered for any specific use patterns that would result in
residential exposure.
    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.''
    There are marked differences among species in the ocular toxicity
associated with bicyclopyrone's mechanism of toxicity, the inhibition
of HPPD. Ocular effects following treatment with HPPD inhibitor
herbicides are seen in the rat but not in the mouse. Monkeys also seem
to be recalcitrant to the ocular toxicity induced by HPPD inhibition.
One explanation for this species-specific response in ocular opacity
may be related to species differences in the clearance of tyrosine. A
metabolic pathway exists to remove tyrosine from the blood that
involves the liver enzyme tyrosine aminotransferase (TAT). In

contrast to rats where ocular toxicity is observed following exposure
to HPPD-inhibiting herbicides, mice and humans are unlikely to achieve
the levels of plasma tyrosine necessary to produce ocular opacities
because the activity of TAT in these species is much greater compared
to rats.
    HPPD inhibitors (e.g., nitisinone) are used as an effective
therapeutic agent to treat patients suffering from rare genetic
diseases of tyrosine catabolism. Treatment starts in childhood but is
often sustained throughout patient's lifetime. The human experience
indicates that a therapeutic dose (1 mg/kg/day dose) of nitisinone has
an excellent safety record in infants, children, and adults and that
serious adverse health outcomes have not been observed in a population
followed for approximately a decade. Rarely, ocular effects are seen in
patients with high plasma tyrosine levels; however, these effects are
transient and can be readily reversed upon adherence to a restricted
protein diet. This observation indicates that an HPPD inhibitor in and
of itself cannot easily overwhelm the tyrosine-clearance mechanism in
humans.
    Therefore, exposures to environmental residues of HPPD-inhibiting
herbicides are unlikely to result in the high blood levels of tyrosine
and ocular toxicity in humans due to an efficient metabolic process to
handle excess tyrosine. The EPA continues to study the complex
relationships between elevated tyrosine levels and biological effects
in various species. In the future, assessments of HPPD-inhibiting
herbicides may consider more appropriate models and cross species
extrapolation methods. Therefore, EPA has not conducted cumulative risk
assessment with other HPPD inhibitors.

D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

    1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the Food Quality
Protection Act Safety Factor (FQPA SF). In applying this provision, EPA
either retains the default value of 10X, or uses a different additional
safety factor when reliable data available to EPA support the choice of
a different factor.
    2. The FQPA SF is retained at 10X for all exposure scenarios based
on use of a LOAEL for the points of departure. The toxicology database
for bicyclopyrone is adequate for characterizing toxicity and
quantification of risk for food and non-food uses; however, a LOAEL
from the New Zealand white rabbit developmental and chronic/
carcinogenicity rat toxicity studies has been used as the POD for
several scenarios.
    There is no evidence of neurotoxicity in either of the
neurotoxicity screening batteries, but there are effects in the chronic
dog study. The level of concern is low, however, since the study and
POD chosen for the chronic dietary exposure scenario is protective of
these effects. There is evidence of increased quantitative fetal
susceptibility following in utero exposure in both rats and rabbits;
however, these effects are well characterized and the selected
endpoints are protective of the observed fetal effects. Lastly, there
are no residual uncertainties in the exposure database.

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

    EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide
exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the
acute PAD (aPAD) and chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer risks, EPA
calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term
risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate food, water,
and residential exposure to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an
adequate MOE exists.
    1. Acute risk. Using the exposure assumptions discussed in this
unit for acute exposure, the acute dietary exposure from food and water
to bicyclopyrone will occupy 4.6% of the aPAD for females 13-49 years
old, the population group receiving the greatest exposure.
    2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
bicyclopyrone from food and water will utilize 90% of the cPAD for
children <1 years old the population group receiving the greatest
exposure. There are no residential uses for bicyclopyrone.
    3. Short-term risk. A short-term adverse effect was identified;
however, bicyclopyrone 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 bicyclopyrone.
    4. Intermediate-term risk. An intermediate-term adverse effect was
identified; however, bicyclopyrone 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 bicyclopyrone.
    5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Because the Agency
has determined that the chronic RfD will be protective of any potential
cancer risk and there is not a chronic risks do not exceed the Agency's
level of concern, EPA concludes that there is not a concern for cancer
risk from exposure to bicyclopyrone.
    6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to bicyclopyrone residues.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    Adequate enforcement methodology liquid chromatography-mass
spectroscopy/mass spectroscopy (LC-MS/MS) methods for tolerance
enforcement have been developed and independently validated. For all
matrices and analytes, the level of quantification (LOQ), defined as
the lowest spiking level where acceptable precision and accuracy data
were obtained, was determined to be 0.01 ppm for each of the common
moieties, SYN503780 and CSCD686480, for a combined LOQ of 0.02 ppm is
available to enforce the tolerance expression.
    The method may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry
Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701

Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755-5350; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
B. International Residue Limits

    In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations
Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food
standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain
the reasons for departing from the Codex level. The Codex has not
established a MRL for bicyclopyrone.

C. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances

    The requested tolerance levels for some wheat and barley raw
agricultural commodities (RAC) differ slightly from those being set by
the EPA. Although both the petitioner and EPA have used the
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)
calculation procedures to determine tolerance levels, EPA determined
that some of the field residue trials were not independent, thus
resulting in different inputs. Using the highest average RAC residues
and average processing factors, EPA calculated tolerance levels for
processed commodities that were generally lower than those requested
and determined that the requested tolerances for residues in/on wheat
and barley germ are not necessary as the expected residue levels are
covered by the RAC tolerance levels.
    Consistent with 40 CFR 180.6, EPA is amending existing livestock
commodity tolerances as necessary. As a result of increased dietary
burdens resulting from the use on wheat and barley commodities, the
existing tolerances of 1.5 ppm for residues in/on the meat byproducts
of cattle, goats, horses, and sheep are increased to 2.0 ppm; and the
existing tolerance of 0.15 ppm for residues in/on for hog meat
byproducts is increased to 0.40 ppm.
    In addition, EPA changed the commodity terminology for aspirated
grain fractions to grain, aspirated fractions in order to conform to
terms used in the Agency's Food and Feed Commodity Vocabulary and
amended the tolerance value for barley, hay from 0.3 ppm to 0.30 ppm to
conform with the Agency policy to carry tolerance levels out two
significant figures.

V. Conclusion

    Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of the herbicide
bicyclopyrone in or on barley, bran at 0.15 ppm; barley, grain, at 0.07
ppm; barley, hay at 0.30 ppm; barley, straw at 0.40 ppm; cattle, meat
byproducts at 2.0 ppm; goat, meat byproducts at 2.0 ppm; grain,
aspirated fractions at 0.30 ppm; hog, meat byproducts at 0.40 ppm;
horse, meat byproducts at 2.0 ppm; sheep, meat byproducts at 2.0 ppm;
wheat, bran at 0.07 ppm; wheat, forage at 0.40 ppm; wheat, grain, at
0.04 ppm; wheat, hay at 0.80 ppm; and wheat, straw at 0.50 ppm.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action establishes tolerances under FFDCA section 408(d) in
response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and
Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this 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). 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: November 3, 2016.
Michael Goodis,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

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

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

0
2. In Sec.  180.682, revise the table in paragraph (a)(1) to read as
follows:

Sec.  180.682   Bicyclopyrone; tolerances for residues.

    (a) * * *
    (1) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Parts per
                        Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Barley, bran............................................            0.15
Barley, grain...........................................            0.07
Barley, hay.............................................            0.30
Barley, straw...........................................            0.40
Cattle, meat byproducts.................................             2.0
Corn, field, forage.....................................            0.30
Corn, field, grain......................................            0.02
Corn, field, stover.....................................            0.40
Corn, pop, grain........................................            0.02
Corn, pop, stover.......................................            0.40
Corn, sweet, forage.....................................            0.40
Corn, sweet, kernel plus cob with husks removed.........            0.03
Corn, sweet, stover.....................................            0.70
Goat, meat byproducts...................................             2.0
Grain, aspirated fractions..............................            0.30
Hog, meat byproducts....................................            0.40
Horse, meat byproducts..................................             2.0
Sheep, meat byproducts..................................             2.0
Sugarcane, cane \1\.....................................            0.02
Wheat, bran.............................................            0.07
Wheat, forage...........................................            0.40
Wheat, grain............................................            0.04
Wheat, hay..............................................            0.80
Wheat, straw............................................            0.50
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no U.S. Registration on Sugarcane as of March 13, 2015.

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016-29005 Filed 12-1-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


From:
STARKWEATHER, DIANA M<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sent:
Friday, February 10, 2023 3:31 PM
To:
Coke ICR2<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Jones, DonnaLee<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Cc:
French, Chuck<EMAIL_ADDRESS>BATTEN, KATIE M<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Subject:
Haverhill Coke Co. ICR Enclosure 2 Fenceline Monitoring Results - due February 10, 2023

Hi Donna Lee,

We are submitting the attached fenceline monitoring results for Haverhill Coke Co. in accordance with the Enclosure 2 request.  Please let me know if you have any questions!

Thank you,

Diana Starkweather
Corporate Environmental, Health & Safety Compliance Manager
SunCoke Energy

 2446 Gallia Pike
 Franklin Furnace, OH 45629
 Office:<PHONE_NUMBER>
 Cell:<PHONE_NUMBER>

<< Fugitive_Emission_Test Results_SunCoke_Haverhill_2022_Q4.xlsx >>


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 55 (Friday, March 20, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 15946-15948]
[FR Doc No: 2020-05765]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0977; Product Identifier 2019-NM-166-AD; Amendment
39-19865; AD 2020-05-15]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Airbus SAS Model A319-131, -132, and -133 airplanes, Model A320-231, -
232, and -233 airplanes, and Model A321-131, -231, and -232 airplanes.
This AD was prompted by a report of rupture of a hydraulic reservoir
air pressurization hose on an in-service airplane, leading to air
leakage that was undetectable during normal operation, and found during
subsequent zonal inspection. This AD requires modifying the airplane by
replacing the affected bleed air hoses with a modification of hydraulic
pressurization lines, as specified in a European Union Aviation Safety
Agency (EASA) AD, which is incorporated by reference. The FAA is
issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective April 24, 2020.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of April 24,
2020.

ADDRESSES: For the material incorporated by reference (IBR) in this AD,
contact the EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany;
telephone +49 221 89990 1000; 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, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA.
For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
206-231-3195. It is also available in the AD docket on the internet at
https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No.
FAA-2019-0977.

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-2019-
0977; 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 final rule, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for Docket Operations is U.S. Department
of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer,
International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2019-0232, dated September 16, 2019
(``EASA AD 2019-0232'') (also referred to as the Mandatory Continuing
Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe
condition for all Airbus SAS Model A319-131, -132, and -133 airplanes,
Model A320-231, -232, and -233 airplanes, and Model A321-131, -231, and
-232 airplanes.
    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all Airbus SAS Model
A319-131, -132, and -133 airplanes, Model A320-231, -232, and -233
airplanes, and Model A321-131, -231, and -232 airplanes. The NPRM
published in the Federal Register on December 16, 2019 (84 FR 68368).
The NPRM was prompted by a report of rupture of a hydraulic reservoir
air pressurization hose on an in-service airplane, leading to air
leakage that was undetectable during normal operation, and found during
subsequent zonal inspection. The NPRM proposed to require modifying the
airplane by replacing the affected bleed air hoses with a modification
of hydraulic pressurization lines, as specified in an EASA AD.
    The FAA is issuing this AD to address this condition, which, if not
detected and corrected, could lead to exposure of the wing structure to
high temperatures (possibly above 200 degrees Celsius (392 degrees
Fahrenheit)), possibly resulting in reduced structural integrity of the
airplane. See the MCAI for additional background information.

Comments

    The FAA gave the public the opportunity to participate in
developing this final rule. The FAA has considered the comments
received. The Air Line Pilots Association, International (ALPA) and
United Airlines indicated support for the NPRM.

Conclusion

    The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments
received, and determined that air safety and the public interest
require adopting this final rule as proposed, except for minor
editorial changes. The FAA has determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for addressing the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.

Related IBR Material Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2019-0232 describes procedures for modifying the airplane
by replacing the affected bleed air hoses with a modification kit that
includes improved bleed air hoses. 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.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 802 airplanes of U.S.
registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
                          Labor cost                              Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6 work-hours x $85 per hour = $510...........................          $4,300           $4,810       $3,857,620
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) 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.

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2020-05-15 Airbus SAS: Amendment 39-19865; Docket No. FAA-2019-0977;
Product Identifier 2019-NM-166-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective April 24, 2020.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Airbus SAS airplanes specified in
paragraphs (c)(1) through (3) of this AD, certificated in any
category.
    (1) Model A319-131, -132, and -133 airplanes.
    (2) Model A320-231, -232, and -233 airplanes.
    (3) Model A321-131, -231, and -232 airplanes.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 29, Hydraulic
power.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report of rupture of a hydraulic
reservoir air pressurization hose on an in-service airplane, leading
to air leakage that was undetectable during normal operation, and
found during subsequent zonal inspection. The FAA is issuing this AD
to address this condition, which, if not detected and corrected,
could lead to exposure of the wing structure to high temperatures
(possibly above 200 degrees Celsius (392 degrees Fahrenheit)),
possibly resulting in reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

(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, European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD
2019-0232, dated September 16, 2019 (``EASA AD 2019-0232'').

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2019-0232

    (1) Where EASA AD 2019-0232 refers to its effective date, this
AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (2) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2019-0232 does not apply
to this AD.

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the International Section, send it to the attention of
the person identified in paragraph (j) of this AD. Information may
be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Before using any
approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or
lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight
standards district office/certificate holding district office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus SAS's
EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the
approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.
    (3) Required for Compliance (RC): For any service information
referenced in EASA AD 2019-0232 that contains RC procedures and
tests: Except as required by paragraph (i)(2) of this AD, RC
procedures and tests must be done to comply with this AD; any
procedures or tests that are not identified as RC are recommended.
Those procedures and tests that are not identified as RC may be
deviated from using accepted methods in accordance with the
operator's maintenance or inspection program without obtaining
approval of an AMOC, provided the procedures and tests identified as
RC can be done and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy
condition. Any substitutions or changes to procedures or tests
identified as RC require approval of an AMOC.

(j) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Sanjay Ralhan,
Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards
Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone
and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2019-0232,
dated September 16, 2019.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For information about EASA AD 2019-0232, contact the EASA,
Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221
89990 6017; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet www.easa.europa.eu.
You may find this EASA AD on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu.
    (4) You may view this material at the FAA, Transport Standards
Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. 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-
2019-0977.
    (5) You may view this material that is incorporated by reference
at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability

of this material at NARA, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to:
https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on March 4, 2020.
Gaetano A. Sciortino,
Deputy Director for Strategic Initiatives, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2020-05765 Filed 3-19-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 88 (Monday, May 8, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 29557-29559]
[FR Doc No: 2023-08950]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2023-1004; Airspace Docket No. 23-ASO-18]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of Class E Airspace; Greenville, NC

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend Class E surface airspace and
Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface in
Greenville, NC, as new instrument approach procedures have been
designed for ECU Health Medical Center Heliport, Greenville, NC, and
evaluations of existing Class E airspace determined modification were
needed. The Class E airspaces for Pitt-Greenville Airport will have
increases in the radii as well as establishing an extension to the

northeast. Also, this action would establish Class E airspace for ECU
Health Medical Center Heliport. In addition, this action would make the
editorial chance replacing the term Notice to Airmen with Notice to Air
Missions in the legal description.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 22, 2023.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by FAA Docket No. FAA-2023-1004 and
Airspace Docket No. 23-ASO-18 using any of the following methods:
    * Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to www.regulations.gov and follow
the online instructions for sending your comments electronically.
    * Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30, U.S. Department
of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W12-140, West
Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    * Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket Operations in
Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except for Federal holidays.
    * Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
www.regulations.gov anytime. Follow the online instructions for
accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140 of
the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except for Federal holidays.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11G Airspace Designations and Reporting Points
and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. You may also contact the Rules and
Regulations Group, Office of Policy, Federal Aviation Administration,
800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Goodson, Operations Support
Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, 1701
Columbia Avenue, College Park, GA 30337; Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority,
as it would amend Class E airspace in Greenville, NC.

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites interested persons to participate in this
rulemaking by submitting written comments, data, or views. Comments are
specifically invited on the proposal's overall regulatory,
aeronautical, economic, environmental, and energy-related aspects. The
most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the proposal,
explain the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting
data. To ensure the docket does not contain duplicate comments,
commenters should submit only once if comments are filed
electronically, or commenters should send only one copy of written
comments if comments are filed in writing.
    The FAA will file all comments it receives in the docket and a
report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel
concerning this proposed rulemaking. Before acting on this proposal,
the FAA will consider all comments it receives on or before the closing
date for comments. The FAA will consider comments filed after the
comment period has closed if it is possible without incurring expense
or delay. The FAA may change this proposal in light of the comments it
receives.
    Privacy: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments
from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts
these comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system
of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.dot.gov/privacy.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded online at
www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking documents can be
accessed through the FAA's web page at www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between
9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except for Federal
holidays. An informal docket may also be examined between 8:00 a.m. and
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except for Federal holidays at the
office of the Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration,
Room 350, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, GA 30337.

Incorporation by Reference

    Class E airspace designations are published in Paragraph 6002 and
6005 of FAA Order JO 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 annually.
This document proposes to amend the current version of that order, FAA
Order JO 7400.11G, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated
August 19, 2022, and effective September 15, 2022. These updates would
subsequently be published in the next update to FAA Order JO 7400.11.
FAA Order JO 7400.11G is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES
section of this document. FAA Order JO 7400.11G lists Class A, B, C, D,
and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

The Proposal

    The FAA proposes an amendment to 14 CFR part 71 by Amending the
Class E surface airspace for Pitt-Greenville Airport, Greenville, NC,
by increasing the radius to 4.6 miles (previously 4.4 miles) and
replacing the outdated Notice to Airmen with the Notice to Air
Missions.
    Amending the Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above
the surface by increasing the radius of the Pitt-Greenville Airport to
7.1 miles (previously 6.4 miles) and establishing an extension of 1.1
miles on each side of the Pitt-Greenville Airport's 008[deg] bearing
extending from the airport's 7.1-mile radius to 13.4 miles northeast of
the airport. In addition, this action would establish Class E airspace
extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.2-mile
radius of ECU Health Medical Center.
    Controlled airspace is necessary for the safety and management of
instrument flight rules (IFR) operations in the area. This action is
necessary to support IFR operations in the area.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and

routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore: (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulatory Policies and Procedures
(44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation
of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal.
Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic
procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this proposed rule,
when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies
and Procedures,'' prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order JO
7400.11G, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 19,
2022, and effective September 15, 2022, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6002 Class E Surface Airspace.

* * * * *

ASO NC E2 Greenville, NC [Amended]

Pitt-Greenville Airport, NC
    (Lat 35[deg]38'09'' N, long 77[deg]23'03'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within a 4.6-
mile radius of Pitt-Greenville Airport. This Class E airspace area
is effective during the specific dates and times established in
advance by a Notice to Air Missions. The effective date and time
will thereafter be continuously published in the Chart Supplement.

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

* * * * *

ASO NC E5 Greenville, NC [Amended]

Pitt-Greenville Airport, NC
    (Lat 35[deg]38'09'' N, long 77[deg]23'03'' W)
ECU Health Medical Center Heliport
    (Lat 35[deg]36'32'' N, long 77[deg]24'19'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 7.1-mile radius of Pitt-Greenville Airport and 1.1 miles on
each side of the Pitt-Greenville Airport's 008[deg] bearing
extending from the airport's 7.1-mile radius to 13.4 miles northeast
of the airport, and that airspace extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface within a 6.2-mile radius of ECU Health Medical
Center Heliport.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on April 24, 2023.
Andreese C. Davis,
Manager, Airspace & Procedures Team South, Eastern Service Center, Air
Traffic Organization.
[FR Doc. 2023-08950 Filed 5-5-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 91 (Wednesday, May 11, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 29325]
[FR Doc No: 2016-10977]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

Hazardous Materials: Notice of Applications for Modification of
Special Permit

AGENCY: Office of Hazardous Materials Safety, Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), DOT.

ACTION: List of Applications for Modification of Special Permits.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the procedures governing the application
for, and the processing of, special permits from the Department of
Transportation's Hazardous Material Regulations (49 CFR part 107,
subpart B), notice is hereby given that the Office of Hazardous
Materials Safety has received the application described herein. Each
mode of transportation for which a particular special permit is
requested is indicated by a number in the ``Nature of Application''
portion of the table below as follows: 1--Motor vehicle, 2--Rail
freight, 3--Cargo vessel, 4--Cargo aircraft only, 5--Passenger-carrying
aircraft.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 10, 2016.
    Address Comments To: Record Center, Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration U.S. Department of Transportation
Washington, DC 20590.
    Comments should refer to the application number and be submitted in
triplicate. If confirmation of receipt of comments is desired, include
a self-addressed stamped postcard showing the special permit number.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ryan Paquet, Director, Office of
Hazardous Materials Approvals and Permits Division, Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, U.S. Department of
Transportation, East Building, PHH-30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
Southeast, Washington, DC 20590-0001,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Copies of the applications are available for
inspection in the Records Center, East Building, PHH-30, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue Southeast, Washington, DC or at http://regulations.gov.
    This notice of receipt of applications for special permit is
published in accordance with Part 107 of the Federal hazardous
materials transportation law (49 U.S.C. 5117(6); 49 CFR 1.53(b)).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on April 21, 2016.
Donald Burger,
Chief, Office of General Approvals and Permits.

                                              Special Permits Data
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Regulation(s)     Nature of the special
        Application No.              Docket No.         Applicant           affected          permits thereof
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
13112-M........................  .................  Carleton           3, 302A..........  To modify the special
                                                     Technologies,                         permit to authorize
                                                     Inc.                                  testing of the
                                                                                pressure relief
                                                                                function by primer
                                                                                auto ignition to take
                                                                                place at the
                                                                                initiator chamber
                                                                                assembly level
                                                                                instead of at the
                                                                                final pressure vessel
                                                                                assembly level.
14920-M........................  .................  Nordco Rail        173.302a(b),       To modify the special
                                                     Services &         172.203(a),        permit to authorize
                                                     Inspection         172.301(c),        3A, 3AL, and DOT-SP
                                                     Technologies Inc.  180.205.           12440 cylinders to be
                                                                                retested by a 100%
                                                                                ultrasonic
                                                                                examination, marking
                                                                                requirements equal to
                                                                                or less than 5
                                                                                inches, different
                                                                                dimensions of a flat
                                                                                bottom hole to be
                                                                                used during
                                                                                ultrasonic
                                                                                examinations, and add
                                                                                an acceptable level
                                                                                of tolerances to the
                                                                                maximum achieved
                                                                                reference amplitude.
16323-M........................  .................  Fibre Drum Sales,  178.801(f).......  To modify the special
                                                     Inc.                                  permit to remove the
                                                                                requirement to
                                                                                perform a leak
                                                                                proofness test on
                                                                                remanufactured
                                                                                composite IBCs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2016-10977 Filed 5-10-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-60-M


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 166 (Friday, August 26, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59018-59020]
[FR Doc No: 2016-20458]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-78631; File No. SR-BatsBYX-2016-21]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Bats BYX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Rule 11.22, Data Products, To Adopt a New Market Data Product Known as
BYX Summary Depth

August 22, 2016.
    Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on August 11, 2016, Bats BYX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``BYX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange
has designated this proposal as a ``non-controversial'' proposed rule
change pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder,\4\ which renders it effective upon filing with the
Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange filed a proposal to amend Rule 11.22 to adopt a new
market data product known as BYX Summary Depth.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
Web site at www.batstrading.com, at the principal office of the
Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 11.22 to adopt a new market
data product known as BYX Summary Depth.\5\ BYX Summary Depth would be
a data feed that offers aggregated two-sided quotations for all
displayed orders entered into the System \6\ for up to five (5) price
levels for securities traded on the Exchange and for which the Exchange
reports quotes under the Consolidated Tape Association (``CTA'') Plan
or the Nasdaq/UTP Plan. BYX Summary Depth also contains the individual
last sale information, Market Status, Retail Liquidity Identifier,
Trading Status, and Trade Break messages. The individual last sale
information will include the price, size, and time of execution. The
last sale message will also include the cumulative number of shares
executed on the Exchange for that trading day. The Exchange will
disseminate the aggregate Best Bid and Offer (``BBO'') and last sale
information through BYX Summary Depth no earlier than it provides its
BBO and last sale information to the processors under the CTA Plan or
the Nasdaq/UTP Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Currently, the paragraphs within Rule 11.22 skip from
paragraph (i) to paragraph (k). The Exchange now proposes to
renumber current paragraph (k) to Rule 11.22 to as paragraph (j) to
ensure the paragraphs within the rule are consecutively numbered.
    \6\ ``System'' is defined as the ``the electronic communications
and trading facility designated by the Board through which
securities orders of Users Are consolidated for ranking, execution
and, when applicable, routing away.'' See Exchange Rule 1.5(aa).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Market Status message will reflect a change in the status of
the Exchange. For example, the Market Status message would indicate
whether the Exchange is experiencing a systems issue or disruption
resulting in quotation or trade information not currently being
disseminated as part of the aggregated BBO. The Market Status message
will also indicate when Exchange has resolved a systems issue or
disruption and is properly reflecting the status of the aggregated BBO.
The Retail Liquidity Identifier indicator message will be disseminated
pursuant to the Exchange's Retail Price Improvement (``RPI'')
Program.\7\ The

Retail Liquidity Identifier indicates when RPI interest priced at least
$0.001 better than BYX's Protected Bid or Protected Offer for a
particular security is available. The Exchange proposes to disseminate
the Retail Liquidity Indicator via the BYX Summary Feed in the same
manner as it is currently disseminated through consolidated data
streams (i.e., pursuant to the Consolidated Tape Association Plan/
Consolidated Quotation Plan, or CTA/CQ, for Tape A and Tape B
securities, and the Nasdaq UTP Plan for Tape C securities) as well as
through other proprietary data feeds. The Retail Liquidity Identifier
will reflect the symbol and the side (buy or sell) of the RPI interest,
but does not include the price or size of the RPI interest. In
particular, like CQ and UTP quoting outputs, the BYX Summary Feed will
include a field for codes related to the Retail Price Improvement
Identifier. The codes indicate RPI interest that is priced better than
Exchange's Protected Bid or Protected Offer by at least the minimum
level of price improvement required by the Program. The Trade Break
message will indicate when an execution is broken in accordance with
Exchange rules.\8\ The Trading Status message will indicate the current
trading status of a security on the Exchange. For example, a Trading
Status message will be sent when a short sale price restriction is in
effect pursuant to Rule 201 of Regulation SHO (``Short Sale Circuit
Breaker''),\9\ or when the security is subject to a trading halt,
suspension or pause declared by the listing market. A Trading Status
message will be sent whenever a security's trading status changes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ For a description of the RPI Program, see BYX Rule 11.24.
See also Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68303 (November 27,
2012), 77 FR 71652 (December 3, 2012) (SR-BYX-2012-019) (Order
Granting Approval of Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment
No. 2, to Adopt a Retail Price Improvement Program); Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 67734 (August 27, 2012), 77 FR 53242
(August 31, 2012) (SR-BYX-2012-019) (Notice of Filing of Proposed
Rule Change to Adopt a Retail Price Improvement Program).
    \8\ See, e.g., Exchange Rule 11.17, Clearly Erroneous
Executions.
    \9\ 17 CFR 242.200(g); 17 CFR 242.201.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange intends to offer BYX Summary Depth as of January 3,
2017. Prior to January 3, 2017, the Exchange will file a separate rule
change with the Commission proposing fees to be charged for BYX Summary
Depth.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The Exchange understands that its affiliated exchanges
intend to file identical proposed rule changes to adopt rules and
fees for the Book Viewer data feed with the Commission. The
Exchange's affiliates are Bats EDGA Exchange, Inc., (``EDGA''), Bats
EDGX Exchange, Inc. (``EDGX''), and Bats BZX Exchange, Inc.
(``BZX'') (collectively, the ``Bats Exchanges'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with section 6(b) of the Act,\11\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\12\ in particular, in that it
is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices,
to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system, and to protect investors and the public
interest, and that it is not designed to permit unfair discrimination
among customers, brokers, or dealers. This proposal is in keeping with
those principles in that it promotes increased transparency through the
dissemination of BYX Summary Depth. The Exchange also believes this
proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act because it
protects investors and the public interest and promotes just and
equitable principles of trade by providing investors with an
alternative for receiving market data as requested by market data
vendors and purchasers that expressed an interest in exchange-only data
for instances where consolidated data is no longer required to be
purchased and displayed. The proposed rule change would benefit
investors by facilitating their prompt access to real-time depth-of-
book information contained in BYX Summary Depth.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also believes that the proposed rule change is
consistent with Section 11(A) of the Act \13\ in that it supports (i)
fair competition among brokers and dealers, among exchange markets, and
between exchange markets and markets other than exchange markets and
(ii) the availability of information with respect to quotations for and
transactions in securities to brokers, dealers, and investors.
Furthermore, the proposed rule change is consistent with Rule 603 of
Regulation NMS,\14\ which provides that any national securities
exchange that distributes information with respect to quotations for or
transactions in an NMS stock do so on terms that are not unreasonably
discriminatory. BYX Summary Depth would be accessed and subscribed to
on a voluntary basis, in that neither the Exchange nor market data
distributors are required by any rule or regulation to make this data
available. Accordingly, distributors and subscribers can discontinue
their use at any time and for any reason.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1.
    \14\ See 17 CFR 242.603.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In adopting Regulation NMS, the Commission granted self-regulatory
organizations and broker-dealers increased authority and flexibility to
offer new and unique market data to consumers of such data. It was
believed that this authority would expand the amount of data available
to users and consumers of such data and also spur innovation and
competition for the provision of market data. The Exchange believes
that the data products proposed herein are precisely the sort of market
data products that the Commission envisioned when it adopted Regulation
NMS. The Commission concluded that Regulation NMS--by lessening
regulation of the market in proprietary data--would itself further the
Act's goals of facilitating efficiency and competition:

    [E]fficiency is promoted when broker-dealers who do not need the
data beyond the prices, sizes, market center identifications of the
NBBO and consolidated last sale information are not required to
receive (and pay for) such data. The Commission also believes that
efficiency is promoted when broker-dealers may choose to receive
(and pay for) additional market data based on their own internal
analysis of the need for such data.\15\

    \15\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496 (June 29, 2005) (File No. S7-10-04) (``Regulation
NMS Adopting Release'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

By removing ``unnecessary regulatory restrictions'' on the ability of
exchanges to sell their own data, Regulation NMS advanced the goals of
the Act and the principles reflected in its legislative history.
    In addition, BYX Summary Depth removes impediments to and perfects
the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system by
providing investors with alternative market data and competing with
similar market data products currently offered by the New York Stock
Exchange, Inc. (``NYSE'') and the Nasdaq Stock Market LLC
(``Nasdaq'').\16\ The provision of new options for investors to receive
market

data was a primary goal of the market data amendments adopted by
Regulation NMS.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Nasdaq Rule 7023(a)(1)(C) (describing Nasdaq TotalView
as a depth-of-book data feed that includes all orders and quotes
from all Nasdaq members displayed in the Nasdaq Market Center as
well as the aggregate size of such orders and quotes at each price
level in the execution functionality of the Nasdaq Market Center).
See NYSE OpenBook available at http://www.nyxdata.com/openbook (last
visited July 5, 2016) (providing real-time view of the NYSE limit
order book including the aggregated size at each price level). See
Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 46843 (November 18, 2002), 67
FR 70471 (November 22, 2002) (SR-NASD-2002-33) (order approving fees
for Nasdaq TotalView); and 45138 (December 7, 2001), 66 FR 64895
(December 14, 2001) (SR-NYSE-2001-42) (order approving fees for NYSE
OpenBook).
    \17\ See Regulation NMS Adopting Release, supra note 14.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.\18\ The Exchange
believes that the proposal will promote competition by enabling the
Exchange to offer a market data product similar to that currently
offered by the NYSE and Nasdaq.\19\ Thus, the Exchange believes this
proposed rule change is necessary to permit fair competition among
national securities exchanges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ The Bats One Feed is a data feed that disseminates, on a
real-time basis, the aggregate BBO of all displayed orders for
securities traded on each of the Bats Exchanges and for the Bats
Exchanges report quotes under the CTA Plan or the Nasdaq/UTP Plan.
The Bats One Feed also contains the individual last sale information
for the Bats Exchanges (collectively with the aggregate BBO, the
``Bats One Summary Feed''). In addition, the Bats One Feed contains
optional functionality which enables recipients to receive
aggregated two-sided quotations from the Bats Exchanges for up to
five (5) price levels (``Bats One Premium Feed''). See Exchange Rule
11.22(i). See also Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73918
(December 23, 2014), 79 FR 78920 (December 31, 2014) (File Nos. SR-
EDGX-2014-25; SR-EDGA-2014-25; SR-BATS-2014-055; SR-BYX-2014-030)
(Notice of Amendments No. 2 and Order Granting Accelerated Approval
to Proposed Rule Changes, as Modified by Amendments Nos. 1 and 2, to
Establish a New Market Data Product called the Bats One Feed)
(``Bats One Approval Order''). The Exchange uses the following data
feeds to create the Bats One Feed, each of which are available to
vendors: EDGX Depth, EDGA Depth, BYX PITCH Feed, and the BZX PITCH
Feed. The Exchange notes that a vendor could utilize the proposed
BYX Summary Depth Feed, as well as the summarized depth feeds to be
proposed by BZX, EDGA, and EDGX to create a competing product to the
Bats One Feed. Supra note 10. The Exchange represents that a
competing vendor could obtain these data feeds from each Bats
Exchange on the same latency basis as the system that performs the
aggregation and consolidation of the Bats One Feed. See Bats One
Approval Order. While the proposed BYX Summary Depth Feed does not
contain the symbol summary or consolidated volume data included in
the Bats One Feed, a vendor could include this information in a
competing product as this information is easily derivable from the
proposed feeds or can be obtained from the securities information
processors on the same terms as the Exchange.
    \19\ See supra note 16.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Because the proposed rule change does not (i) significantly affect
the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30
days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \20\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \21\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). As required under Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii), the Exchange provided the Commission with written
notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a
brief description and the text of the proposed rule change, at least
five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule
change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File No. SR-BatsBYX-2016-21 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File No. SR-BatsBYX-2016-21. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; 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 No. SR-BatsBYX-2016-21, and should be
submitted on or before September 16, 2016.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-20458 Filed 8-25-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P