[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 3 (Thursday, January 5, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 1175-1179]
[FR Doc No: 2016-30411]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2016-7424; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-173-AD;
Amendment 39-18756; AD 2016-25-30]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Airbus Model A330-200, -200 Freighter, and -300 series airplanes; and
Model A340-200, -300, -500, and -600 series airplanes. This AD was
prompted by certain anomalies of the flight guidance computers. We are
issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective February 9, 2017.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of February 9,
2017.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office--EAL, 1 Rond Point Maurice
Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone: +33 5 61 93 36 96;
fax: +33 5 61 93 45 80; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet: http://www.airbus.com. You may view this referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available on the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating
Docket No. FAA-2016-7424.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
7424; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone:
800-647-5527) is Docket Management Facility, 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: Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM 116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would

apply to all Airbus Model A330-200, -200 Freighter, and -300 series
airplanes; and Model A340-200, -300, -500, and -600 series airplanes.
The NPRM published in the Federal Register on July 7, 2016 (81 FR
44235) (``the NPRM'').
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD
2015-0124R2, dated August 31, 2016 (referred to after this as the
Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to
correct an unsafe condition for all Airbus Model A330-200, -200
Freighter, and -300 series airplanes; and Model A340-200, -300, -500,
and -600 series airplanes. The MCAI states:

    It was determined that, when there are significant differences
between all airspeed sources, the flight controls of an Airbus A330
or A340 aeroplane will revert to alternate law, the autopilot (AP)
and the auto-thrust (A/THR) automatically disconnect, and the Flight
Director (FD) bars are automatically removed. Further analyses have
shown that, after such an event, if two airspeed sources become
similar while still erroneous, the flight guidance computers will
display the FD bars again, and enable the re-engagement of AP and A/
THR. However, in some cases, the AP orders may be inappropriate,
such as an abrupt pitch command.
    This condition, if not corrected, may, under specific
circumstances, result in reduced control of the aeroplane.
    In order to prevent such events, EASA issued AD 2010-0271 [which
corresponds to FAA AD 2011-02-09, Amendment 39-16583 (76 FR 4219,
January 25, 2011)] to require an amendment of the Airplane Flight
Manual (AFM) to ensure that flight crews apply the appropriate
operational procedure.
    Since EASA AD 2010-0271 was issued, new Flight Control Primary
Computer (FCPC) software standards were developed that inhibit
autopilot engagement under unreliable airspeed conditions.
Consequently, EASA issued AD 2011-0199 (later revised) [which
corresponds to FAA AD 2013-19-14, Amendment 39-17596 (78 FR 68347,
November 14, 2013)] for A330 and A340-200/300 aeroplanes, and [EASA]
AD 2013-0107 [which also corresponds to FAA AD 2013-19-14] for A340-
500/600 aeroplanes, to require a software standard upgrade of the
three FCPCs by either modification or replacement.
    Since EASA AD 2011-0199R1 and [EASA] AD 2013-0107 were issued,
new FCPC software standards were developed to correct aeroplane
behaviour in case of undetected erroneous (Radio Altimeter) RA
information and to introduce other improvements. In addition, the
new FCPC software standards also implement enhanced Angle of Attack
(AOA) monitoring in order to better detect cases of AOA blockage,
including multiple AOA blockage.
    Prompted by these developments, EASA issued AD 2015-0124 (later
revised) to require the latest software standard upgrade of the
three FCPCs, either by modification or replacement. At the time,
some of the Airbus SBs as specified in Table 1 (originally, Appendix
1) of this [EASA] AD were not yet available.
    Since EASA AD 2015-0124R1 was issued, Airbus published SB A340-
27-5064, and for this reason, this [EASA] AD is revised to introduce
the date of publication of this SB. This [EASA] AD also contains
some editorial changes to meet the latest [EASA] AD writing
standards, without changes to the technical content.
    There is still one SB that remains unavailable at this time. It
is expected that this [EASA] AD will be revised again when this SB
is published.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
7424.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM and
the FAA's response to each comment.

Support for the NPRM

    The Air Line Pilots Association, International stated that it had
no objection to the NPRM.

Request To Include Certain Service Information in the NPRM

    Airbus requested that Airbus Service Bulletin A340-27-5064, dated
June 1, 2016, (``SB A340-27-5064, Revision 0''), which is applicable to
Airbus Model A340-500 and -600 series airplanes, be included in the
NPRM. Airbus noted that SB A340-27-5064, Revision 0, was issued after
the NPRM was published and that EASA planned to issue a revision to
EASA AD 2015-0124R1, dated February 2, 2016, to include SB A340-27-
5064, Revision 0.
    We agree with the commenter's request to include SB A340-27-5064,
Revision 0, in this final rule. Paragraph (g) of the proposed AD
instructed operators of Model A340-500 and -600 series airplanes to
upgrade the three FCPCs in accordance with a method approved by the
Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate,
FAA; or EASA; or Airbus's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). Now
that SB A340-27-5064, Revision 0, is available, we have revised
paragraph (g) of this AD to require the upgrade to be done in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable
service information specified in paragraphs (h)(1), (h)(2), (h)(3),
(h)(4), and (h)(5) of this AD. We have added a new paragraph (h)(5) to
this AD, which identifies the service information for Model A340-541
and A340-642 series airplanes with hardware standard FCPC 2K2 as Airbus
Service Bulletin A340-27-5064, dated June 1, 2016.
    In addition, the commenter is correct that EASA has revised AD
2015-0124 R1, dated February 2, 2016, to include SB A340-27-5064,
Revision 0. We have revised the Discussion section of this final rule
and paragraph (p)(1), Related Information, of this AD to refer to the
revised EASA AD 2015-0124R2, dated August 31, 2016.

Request To Include Certain Airplane Models in the NPRM

    Airbus stated that the NPRM addressed Model A330-200, -200
Freighter, and -300 series airplanes; and Model A340-200 and -300
airplanes; but not Model A340-500 and -600 series airplanes. Airbus
commented that there were inconsistencies in the NPRM because if Model
A340-500 and -600 series airplanes are not included in the
applicability then paragraph (l) of the NPRM was incorrect because it
referred to AD 2013-19-14, which includes all Model A340-541 and -642
airplanes in its applicability.
    We infer that Airbus is requesting that Model A340-541 and -642
airplanes be included in the applicability of the NPRM, or requesting
that this AD be revised to remove all text that is associated with
Model A340-541 and -642 airplanes.
    We agree to clarify. Model A340-541 and -642 airplanes were
included in the applicability of the proposed AD and continue to be
included in the applicability of this AD. The SUMMARY section of the
NPRM included Model A340-500 and -600 series airplanes, and paragraphs
(c)(6) and (c)(7) of the proposed AD included Model A340-541 and -642
airplanes, respectively. In addition, paragraph (g) of the proposed AD
specified that operators of Model A340-500 and -600 airplanes must
upgrade the FCPCs in accordance with a method approved by the Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116 Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or
the EASA; or Airbus's EASA DOA. For clarification we have revised the
header of paragraph (g) of this AD to include Model A340-500 and -600
series airplanes.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this AD with the changes described previously and minor editorial
changes. We have determined that these minor changes:

     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for correcting the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.
    We also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed the following service information:
     Airbus Service Bulletin A330-27-3205, Revision 02, dated
March 23, 2016.
     Airbus Service Bulletin A330-27-3207, dated June 30, 2015.
     Airbus Service Bulletin A340-27-4195, dated November 24,
2015.
     Airbus Service Bulletin A340-27-4196, dated November 24,
2015.
     Airbus Service Bulletin A340-27-5064, dated June 1, 2016.
    The service information describes procedures for upgrading
(replacing or modifying) the software standards for the FCPCs. These
documents are distinct since they apply to different airplane models.
This service information 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

    We estimate that this AD affects 92 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
              Action                     Labor cost            Parts cost           product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modification/replacement..........  3 work-hours x $85    Not available.......            $255          $23,460
                                     per hour = $255.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to the manufacturer, some of the costs of this AD may be
covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected
individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected
individuals. As a result, we have included all costs in our cost
estimate.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

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):

2016-25-30 Airbus: Amendment 39-18756; Docket No. FAA-2016-7424;
Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-173-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective February 9, 2017.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD affects the ADs identified in paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2),
(b)(3), and (b)(4) of this AD:
    (1) AD 2012-08-02, Amendment 39-17018 (77 FR 24829, April 26,
2012) (``AD 2012-08-02'').
    (2) AD 2013-03-06, Amendment 39-17341 (78 FR 15279, March 11,
2013) (``AD 2013-03-06'').
    (3) AD 2013-05-08, Amendment 39-17380 (78 FR 27015, May 9, 2013;
corrected August 29, 2013 (78 FR 53237)) (``AD 2013-05-08'').
    (4) AD 2013-19-14, Amendment 39-17596 (78 FR 68347, November 14,
2013) (``AD 2013-19-14'').

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the Airbus airplanes, certificated in any
category, identified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(7) of this AD,
all manufacturer serial numbers.
    (1) Model A330-223F and -243F airplanes.
    (2) Model A330-201, -202, -203, -223, and -243 airplanes.
    (3) Model A330-301, -302, -303, -321, -322, -323, -341, -342,
and -343 airplanes.
    (4) Model A340-211, -212, and -213 airplanes.
    (5) Model A340-311, -312, and -313 airplanes.
    (6) Model A340-541 airplanes.
    (7) Model A340-642 airplanes.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 27, Flight
Controls.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a determination that, due to significant
differences among all airspeed sources, the flight controls will
revert to alternate law, the autopilot (AP) and the auto-thrust (A/
THR) will automatically disconnect, and the flight director (FD)
bars will be automatically removed. Then, if two airspeed sources
become similar while still erroneous, the flight guidance computers
will display the FD bars again, and enable the re-engagement of the
AP and A/THR. In some

cases, however, the AP orders may be inappropriate, such as a
possible abrupt pitch command. We are issuing this AD to prevent AP
engagement under unreliable airspeed conditions, which could result
in reduced control of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) New Software Standard Upgrade for Model A330 Series Airplanes, and
Model A340-200, -300, -500, and -600 Series Airplanes

    At the applicable time specified in table 1 to paragraph (g) of
this AD: Upgrade (by modification or replacement, as applicable) the
three flight control primary computers (FCPCs), as specified in
table 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable service information
specified in paragraphs (h)(1), (h)(2), (h)(3), (h)(4), and (h)(5)
of this AD.

   Table 1 to Paragraph (g) of This AD--Software Standard Updates and
                            Compliance Times
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Compliance time
        Software standard          Hardware standard    after effective
                                                        date of this AD
------------------------------------------------------------------------
P13/M22.........................  FCPC 2K2..........  Within 9 months.
P14/M23.........................  FCPC 2K1..........  Within 9 months.
M23.............................  FCPC 2K0..........  Within 9 months.
L24.............................  FCPC 2K1 or 2K0...  Within 15 months.
L23.............................  FCPC 2K2..........  Within 15 months.
W13.............................  FCPC 2K2..........  Within 15 months.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

 (h) Service Information

    For the upgrade required by paragraph (g) of this AD, applicable
service information is identified in paragraphs (h)(1), (h)(2),
(h)(3), (h)(4), and (h)(5) of this AD.
    (1) For Model A330 airplanes with hardware standard FCPC 2K2:
Airbus Service Bulletin A330-27-3205, Revision 02, dated March 23,
2016.
    (2) For Model A330 airplanes with hardware standard FCPC 2K1 or
FCPC 2K0: Airbus Service Bulletin A330-27-3207, dated June 30, 2015.
    (3) For Model A340-200 and -300 series airplanes with hardware
standard FCPC 2K0 or FCPC 2K1: Airbus Service Bulletin A340-27-4195,
dated November 24, 2015.
    (4) For Model A340-200 and -300 series airplanes with hardware
standard FCPC 2K2: Airbus Service Bulletin A340-27-4196, dated
November 24, 2015.
    (5) For Model A340-500 and A340-600 series airplanes with
hardware standard FCPC 2K2: Airbus Service Bulletin A340-27-5064,
dated June 1, 2016.

 (i) Removal of Certain Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) Requirements

    After accomplishing the FCPC upgrade required by paragraph (g)
of this AD, the AFM operational procedures required by the AFM
revisions identified in paragraphs (i)(1), (i)(2), and (i)(3) of
this AD are no longer required and can be removed from the AFM for
that airplane only.
    (1) The AFM revision required by paragraph (g) of AD 2013-19-14.
    (2) The AFM revision required by paragraph (h) of AD 2013-19-14.
    (3) The AFM revision required by paragraph (g) of AD 2013-03-06.

 (j) Removal of Certain Other AFM Requirements

    Accomplishing the FCPC upgrade required by paragraph (g) of this
AD terminates the dispatch limitations required by paragraphs (g),
(h), and (i) of AD 2012-08-02 for that airplane only, and after
accomplishing the FCPC upgrade, those dispatch limitations can be
removed from the AFM for that airplane only.

 (k) Certain Actions Required by AD 2013-05-08 Affected by This AD

    Accomplishing the FCPC upgrade required by paragraph (g) this AD
constitutes compliance with the requirements of paragraph (l) and
paragraphs (o)(1) through (o)(4) of AD 2013-05-08.

 (l) Certain Actions Required by AD 2013-19-14 Affected by This AD

    Accomplishing the FCPC upgrade required by paragraph (g) this AD
constitutes compliance with the requirements of paragraphs (i) and
(j) of AD 2013-19-14.

 (m) Airplanes Excluded From Certain Requirements

    For Airbus Model A330 series airplanes having Airbus
Modification 202680 (installation of FCPC 2K2 with software standard
P13/M22) incorporated in production: The actions specified in
paragraph (g) of this AD are not required, provided it can be
positively determined that since the date of issuance of the
original certificate of airworthiness or the original export
certificate of airworthiness, no FCPC has been replaced on that
airplane with an FCPC having an earlier standard.

 (n) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by
paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the
effective date of this AD using Airbus Service Bulletin A330-27-
3205, dated March 9, 2015; or Airbus Service Bulletin A330-27-3205,
Revision 01, dated July 3, 2015.

 (o) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, 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 Branch, send it to ATTN: Vladimir
Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
WA 98057-3356; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
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 corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or EASA; or
Airbus's EASA DOA. If approved by the DOA, the approval must include
the DOA-authorized signature.
    (3) Required for Compliance (RC): If any service information
contains procedures or tests that are identified as RC, those
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.

 (p) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) EASA AD 2015-0124R2, dated August 31, 2016, for related
information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the Internet
at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket
No. FAA-2016-7424.

    (2) Service information identified in this AD that is not
incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in
paragraphs (q)(3) and (q)(4) of this AD.

 (q) 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) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-27-3205, Revision 02, dated
March 23, 2016.
    (ii) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-27-3207, dated June 30, 2015.
    (iii) Airbus Service Bulletin A340-27-4195, dated November 24,
2015.
    (iv) Airbus Service Bulletin A340-27-4196, dated November 24,
2015.
    (v) Airbus Service Bulletin A340-27-5064, dated June 1, 2016.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office--EAL, 1 Rond Point Maurice
Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone: +33 5 61 93 36 96;
fax: +33 5 61 93 45 80; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet: http://www.airbus.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 7, 2016.
Dionne Palermo,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-30411 Filed 1-4-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 227 (Monday, November 28, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73016-73017]
[FR Doc No: 2022-25904]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2022-0002; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-2289]

Proposed Flood Hazard Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland
Security.

ACTION: Notice.

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

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

DATES: Comments are to be submitted on or before February 27, 2023.

ADDRESSES: The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, the FIS report
for each community are available for inspection at both the online
location https://hazards.fema.gov/femaportal/prelimdownload and the
respective Community Map Repository address listed in the tables below.
Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS report for each
community are accessible online through the FEMA Map Service Center at
https://msc.fema.gov for comparison.
    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FEMA-B-2289, to
Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance
and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW, Washington, DC
20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email) [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering
Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA,
400 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email)
[email protected]; or visit the FEMA Mapping and Insurance
eXchange (FMIX) online at https://www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

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

with multiple ongoing Preliminary studies, the studies can be
identified by the unique project number and Preliminary FIRM date
listed in the tables. Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS
report for each community are accessible online through the FEMA Map
Service Center at https://msc.fema.gov for comparison.

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

Michael M. Grimm,
Assistant Administrator for Risk Management, Federal Emergency
Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Community map repository
               Community                             address
------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Breckinridge County, Kentucky and Incorporated Areas
           Project: 20-04-0002S Preliminary Date: May 10, 2022
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Cloverport.....................  City Hall, 212 West Main
                                          Street, Cloverport, KY 40111.
Unincorporated Areas of Breckinridge     Breckinridge County Courthouse,
 County.                                  208 South Main Street,
                                          Hardinsburg, KY 40143.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Daviess County, Kentucky and Incorporated Areas
           Project: 20-04-0002S Preliminary Date: May 10, 2022
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Owensboro......................  Public Works Building, 1410
                                          West 5th Street, Owensboro, KY
                                          42301.
Unincorporated Areas of Daviess County.  Daviess County Courthouse, 212
                                          Saint Ann Street, Owensboro,
                                          KY 42303.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Hancock County, Kentucky and Incorporated Areas
           Project: 20-04-0002S Preliminary Date: May 10, 2022
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Hawesville.....................  City Hall, 395 Main Street,
                                          Hawesville, KY 42348.
City of Lewisport......................  City Hall, 405 2nd Street,
                                          Lewisport, KY 42351.
Unincorporated Areas of Hancock County.  Hancock County Administration
                                          Building, 225 Main Cross
                                          Street, Hawesville, KY 42348.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Henderson County, Kentucky and Incorporated Areas
           Project: 20-04-0002S Preliminary Date: May 10, 2022
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Henderson......................  Municipal Center, 222 1st
                                          Street, Henderson, KY 42420.
Unincorporated Areas of Henderson        City of Henderson Police
 County.                                  Department, 1990 Barrett
                                          Court, Suite A, Henderson, KY
                                          42420.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2022-25904 Filed 11-25-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-12-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 108 (Thursday, June 4, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 34436]
[FR Doc No: 2020-12036]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OW-2020-0026; FRL-10010-31-OW]

Notice of Recent Specifications Review and Request for
Information on WaterSense Program; Extension of Comment Period

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice; request for information; extension of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is extending
the comment period for the document issued in the Federal Register on
April 10, 2020, entitled ``Notice of Recent Specifications Review and
Request for Information on WaterSense Program.'' In response to
stakeholder requests, the EPA is extending the comment period an
additional 45 days from June 9, 2020 to July 24, 2020. Please note
changes for public visitors to the EPA Docket Center and Reading Room
in the Public Participation section of this document.

DATES: The comment period for the document that published on April 10,
2020, at 85 FR 20268 is extended. Comments must be received on or
before July 24, 2020.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OW-2020-0026, by the following method:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov/.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OW-2020-0026. Comments received may be posted without change
to https://www.regulations.gov/, including any personal information
provided. For detailed instructions on sending comments, see the Public
Participation under the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this
document.
    Out of an abundance of caution for members of the public and our
staff, the EPA Docket Center and Reading Room was closed to public
visitors on March 31, 2020, to reduce the risk of transmitting COVID-
19. Our Docket Center staff will continue to provide remote customer
service via email, phone, and webform. We encourage the public to
submit comments via https://www.regulations.gov or email, as there is a
temporary suspension of mail delivery to EPA, and no hand deliveries
are currently accepted. For further information on EPA Docket Center
services and the current status, please visit us online at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information, please
contact Stephanie Tanner, Office of Water (mail code 4204M),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; or email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(preferred). Also see the following website
for additional information on this topic: https://www.epa.gov/watersense/product-specification-review.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2020-
0026 via the https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or withdrawn. The EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general
guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
    The EPA is temporarily suspending its Docket Center and Reading
Room for public visitors to reduce the risk of transmitting COVID-19.
Written comments submitted by mail are temporarily suspended and no
hand deliveries will be accepted. Our Docket Center staff will continue
to provide remote customer service via email, phone, and webform. We
encourage the public to submit comments via https://www.regulations.gov. For further information and updates on EPA Docket
Center services, please visit us online at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    The EPA continues to carefully and continuously monitor information
from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), local area
health departments, and our Federal partners so that we can respond
rapidly as conditions change regarding COVID-19.

II. General Information

    On April 10, 2020, the EPA published in the Federal Register (85 FR
20268) a request for public comment on any data, surveys, or studies to
help assess consumer satisfaction with WaterSense labeled products,
which could inform future product specification development. The EPA is
also seeking input on how to design a study or studies to inform future
reviews that incorporate customer satisfaction considerations. The
results of these studies could inform future Agency action when
developing criteria for labeling products in the WaterSense program.
The EPA is also requesting input on whether it should include consumer
satisfaction criteria into the WaterSense program guidelines and, if
included, what criteria should be considered and how.
    The EPA also announced on April 10th the completion of the review
of WaterSense product performance criteria as required under the
America's Water Infrastructure Act (AWIA) of 2018. The AWIA required
the EPA to consider for review and revision, if necessary,
specifications which were released prior to 2012. The EPA announced
that it has completed its review and made the decision not to revise
any specifications.

    Dated: May 27, 2020.
Andrew D. Sawyers,
Director, Office of Wastewater Management.
[FR Doc. 2020-12036 Filed 6-3-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 13 (Friday, January 18, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4175-4180]
[FR Doc No: 2013-00967]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-68645; File No. SR-MIAX-2012-05]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Miami International Securities
Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a
Proposed Rule Change To Amend the MIAX Options Fee Schedule

January 14, 2013.
    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 December 31, 2012, Miami International Securities Exchange LLC
(``Exchange'' or ``MIAX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the self-
regulatory organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange is filing a proposal to amend the MIAX Options Fee
Schedule (the ``Fee Schedule'') to establish membership and system
connectivity fees applicable to Members and non-Members using services
provided by MIAX. While changes to the Exchange's Fee Schedule pursuant
to this proposal are effective upon filing, the Exchange has designated
that the proposed monthly Port Fees and the proposed monthly Member
Participant Identifier Fee be implemented beginning January 1, 2013.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://www.miaxoptions.com/filter/wotitle/rule_filing, at
MIAX's principal office, 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 aspects of
such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to establish membership
and system connectivity fees applicable to Members and non-Members
using services provided by MIAX.
    Membership Fees:
    MIAX will assess Membership fees for Applications and Trading
Permits.
a. Application for MIAX Membership
    A one-time application fee based upon the applicant's status as
either an Electronic Exchange Member (``EEM'') or as a Market Maker
will be assessed by MIAX. Applicants for MIAX Membership as an EEM will
be assessed a one-time Application Fee of $2,500.00. Applicants for
MIAX Membership as a Market Maker will be assessed a one-time
Application Fee of $3,000.00. The difference in the fee charged to EEMs
and Market Makers reflects the additional review and processing effort
needed for Market Maker applications. MIAX's one-time application fees
are similar to and generally lower than one time application fees in
place at the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated (``CBOE'')
($3,000 for an individual applicant and $5,000 for an applicant
organization) and at the International Securities Exchange, LLC
(``ISE'') ($7,500 for a Primary Market Maker, $5,500 for a Competitive
Market Maker and $3,500 for an Electronic Access Member).
    Applicants for MIAX membership that apply for membership on or
before January 31, 2013 will not be assessed a fee for such
application. MIAX believes that this will provide incentive for
potential applicants to submit early applications, which should result
in maximizing potential order flow and liquidity as MIAX begins
trading, all to the benefit of the investing public. Applicants for
MIAX membership that apply for membership on or after February 1, 2013
will be subject to the Membership Application Fees described above.
b. Trading Permits
    MIAX will issue Trading Permits that confer the ability to transact
on MIAX. There is no limit on the number of Trading Permits that may be
issued by MIAX; however MIAX has the authority to limit or decrease the
number of Trading Permits it has determined to issue provided it
complies with the provisions set forth in Rule 200(a) and Section
6(c)(4) of the Exchange Act.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ For a complete description of MIAX Trading Permits, see MIAX
Rule 200. See also 15 U.S.C. 78(f)(c)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    MIAX will assess monthly fees for Trading Permits depending upon
the category of Member that is issued a particular trading permit. EEMs
will be assessed a monthly fee of $1,000 for a Trading Permit.
Registered Market Makers (``RMMs'') will be assessed $3,000.00 per
month for a Trading Permit for an RMM assignment in up to 100 option
classes, $4,500.00 per month for a Trading Permit for an RMM assignment
in up to 250 option classes, or $6,000.00 per month for a Trading
Permit for an RMM assignment in all option classes listed on MIAX.
    For the calculation of the monthly RMM Trading Permit Fees, the
number of classes is defined as the greatest number of classes the RMM
was assigned to quote in on any given day within the calendar month.
    Primary Lead Market Makers (``PLMMs'') and Lead Market Makers
(``LMMs'') will be assessed the same monthly Trading Permit fees
applicable to RMMs described above. In addition to the RMM Trading
Permit fees, PLMMs and LMMs will be assessed an additional $1,000.00
per month for a Trading Permit. Thus, an LMM or PLMM will be assessed
$4,000.00 per month for a Trading Permit for an LMM or PLMM assignment
in up to 100 option classes, $5,500.00 per month for a Trading Permit
for an LMM or PLMM assignment in up to 250 option classes, or $7,000.00
per month for a Trading Permit for an LMM or PLMM assignment in all
option classes listed on MIAX.
    MIAX monthly Trading Permit Fees are generally lower than monthly
trading permit fees in place at CBOE and the NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC
(``PHLX''). The $1,000 monthly Trading Permit fee assessed to EEMs is
lower than the CBOE's monthly electronic access trading permit fee
($1,600) and the PHLX's monthly permit fee for members ($2,000). The
Monthly Trading Permit Fees assessed to MIAX Market Makers is readily
comparable to and lower than the monthly fees in place at PHLX for
Remote Streaming Quote Traders ($5,000 per month for less than 100
classes, $8,000 per month for more than 100 classes and less than 999
classes, and $11,000 per month for 1,000 or more classes).
    Members receiving Trading Permits during the month will be assessed
Trading Permit Fees according to the above schedule, except that the
calculation of the Trading Permit fee for the first month in which the
Trading Permit is issued will be pro-rated based on the number of
trading days occurring after the date on which the Trading Permit was
in effect during that first month divided by the total number of
trading days in such month multiplied by the monthly rate.
    Testing and Certification Fees:
a. API Testing and Certification Fee
Members
    MIAX will assess a one-time Application Programming Interface
(``API'') testing and certification fee on EEMs and Market Makers. An
API makes it possible for Member software to communicate with MIAX
software applications, and is subject to Member testing with, and
certification by, MIAX. API testing and certification includes for EEMs
testing all available order types, new order entry, order management,
order throughput and mass order cancellation. For Market Makers, API
testing and certification also includes testing of all available quote
types, quote throughput, quote management and cancellation, Aggregate
Risk Manager settings and triggers, and confirmation of quotes within
the trading engines.
    The one-time MIAX API Testing and Certification fees are based upon
the category of Member being tested and certified. EEMs will be
assessed a one-time API Testing and Certification fee of $1,000.00.
Market Makers will be assessed a one-time API Testing and Certification
fee of $2,500.00. The fee represents costs incurred by the Exchange as
it works with each Member while testing and certifying that the
Member's software systems communicate properly with MIAX. MIAX has set
a one-time fee rather than an hourly rate used by some of the other
exchanges so MIAX Members will know the full cost for the service prior
to beginning to use such services. Until recently, PHLX charged hourly
fees for use of its testing facility--a fee of $285 per hour for active
connection testing during normal operating hours and $333 per hour for
testing after normal hours.\4\ MIAX's one-time fees are comparable and
more cost effective to the Members than hourly rates at other
exchanges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 63257 (November 5,
2010) 75 FR 69493 (November 12, 2010) (SR-PHLX 2010-155) Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change to Amend
Fees Assessed for Use of the Testing Facility.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In order to provide an incentive to prospective Members to apply
early for

membership and to engage in API testing and certification such that
they will be able to trade options on MIAX as soon as possible, API
Testing and Certification fees will be waived for all EEMs and Market
Makers that apply for MIAX membership and complete API testing and
certification on or before January 31, 2013. EEMs and Market Makers
that apply for MIAX membership or complete API testing and
certification on or after February 1, 2013 are subject to the Member
API Testing and Certification Fees as described above.
Non-Members
    MIAX will assess a one-time API Testing and Certification fee of
$5,000.00 on third party vendors \5\ and Service Bureaus \6\ whose
software interfaces with MIAX software. As with Members, an API makes
it possible for third party vendors' and Service Bureaus' software to
communicate with MIAX software applications, and is subject to testing
with, and certification by, MIAX. The higher fee charged to such non-
Members reflects the greater amount of time spent by MIAX employees
testing and certifying non-Members. It has been MIAX's experience that
Member testing takes less time than non-Member testing because Members
have more experience testing these systems with exchanges; generally
fewer questions and issues arise during the testing and certification
process. Also, because third party vendors and Service Bureaus are
redistributing data and reselling services to other Members and market
participants the number and types of scenarios that need to be tested
are more numerous and complex than those tested and certified for a
single Member.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Third party vendors are subscribers of MIAX's market and
other data feeds, which they in turn use for redistribution
purposes. Third party vendors do not provide connectivity and
therefore are not subject to Network testing and certification.
    \6\ A Service Bureau is a technology provider that offers and
supplies technology and technology services to a trading firm that
does not have its own proprietary system. The technology and
technology services supplied by Service Bureaus includes both
software applications and connectivity, thus Service Bureaus are
subject to both API testing and certification and Network testing
and certification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. Member Network Testing and Certification Fee
    As described below under Connectivity Fees, MIAX will establish
electronic communication connections with Members and will assess
Members a one-time Testing and Certification Fee of $1,000.00 per
Member for a one Gigabit connection, and $4,000.00 per Member for a ten
Gigabit connection. Members will not be charged a Testing and
Certification Fee for any additional connections they obtain since the
additional connections will be from the same source and will have the
same internal technology.
c. Non-Member Network Testing and Certification Fee
    MIAX will establish electronic connections with and will assess
Service Bureaus and Extranet Providers \7\ a one-time Testing and
Certification Fee of $2,000.00 for the initial one Gigabit connection
and $1,000 for each additional one Gigabit connection. In addition,
MIAX will assess Service Bureaus and Extranet Providers a Testing and
Certification Fee of $6,000.00 for the initial ten Gigabit connection
and $4,000.00 for each additional ten Gigabit connection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ An Extranet Provider is a technology provider that connects
with MIAX systems and in turn provides such connectivity to MIAX
participants that do not connect directly with MIAX. Extranet
Providers do not provide software interfaces with MIAX software
applications, thus Extranet Providers are not subject to API testing
and certification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Member and non-Member Network Testing and Certification fees
represent installation and support costs incurred by the Exchange as it
works with each Member and non-Member to make sure there are
appropriate electronic connections with MIAX. MIAX has set a one-time
fee for testing so MIAX Members and non-Members will know the full cost
for the service prior to beginning to use such services. The higher fee
charged to non-Members reflects the greater amount of time spent by
MIAX employees testing and certifying non-Members. It has been MIAX's
experience that Member network connectivity testing takes less time
than non-Member network connectivity testing because Members have more
experience testing these systems with exchanges; generally fewer
questions and issues arise during the testing and certification
process. In addition, non-Members are charged a discounted Network
Testing and Certification Fee for additional connections because each
connection will be used by different customers of the non-Member
Service Bureaus and Extranet Providers and will need to be individually
tested requiring more Exchange resources for testing and certification.
    Connectivity Fees:
    MIAX will assess fees to Members, Service Bureaus, and Extranet
Providers for electronic connections \8\ between those entities and
MIAX. The Connectivity fees are based upon the amount of bandwidth that
will be used by the Member, Service Bureau, or Extranet Provider. MIAX
currently offers connectivity with one (1) Gigabit, which connects the
Member, Service Bureau, or Extranet Provider to MIAX using a copper
cable, and ten (10) Gigabits, using fiber optic connections.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ For purposes of this proposed rule change, the terms
``connectivity'' and ``connections'' refer to the physical
connections between Member and non-Member electronic networks and
the MIAX systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

a. Member Network Connectivity Fee
    MIAX will assess a monthly Member Network Connectivity fee of
$1,000 for a one Gigabit connection, and $5,000 for a ten Gigabit
connection. MIAX charges a higher fee for a ten Gigabit connection due
the higher costs of the fiber optic connection. MIAX's monthly Member
Network Connectivity fee is comparable to monthly fees charged for
similar connectivity at CBOE ($1,250 for a one Gigabit connection and
$4,500 for a ten Gigabit connection) and PHLX ($2,100 for a one Gigabit
connection and $5,000 for a ten Gigabit connection).
    The first monthly Member Network Connectivity fee for all Members
will be assessed on a pro-rata basis, which is the number of trading
days remaining in the month divided by the total number of trading days
in the first month in which the fee was in effect multiplied by the
monthly rate. Thereafter, the Member Network Connectivity fee will be
pro-rated for new Members based on the number of trading days on which
the Member used the connectivity in its first month of trading on MIAX,
divided by the total number of trading days in such month multiplied by
the monthly rate.
b. Non-Member Network Connectivity Fee
    MIAX will assess a monthly non-Member Network Connectivity fee to
Service Bureaus and Extranet Providers of $2,000.00 for a one Gigabit
connection, and $10,000.00 for a ten Gigabit connection. MIAX's monthly
Non-Member Network Connectivity fee is comparable to monthly fees
charged for similar connectivity at CBOE ($2,500 for a one Gigabit
connection and $7,500 for a ten Gigabit connection). MIAX assesses a
higher fee to Service Bureaus and Extranet Providers than to Members to
reflect the fact that Service Bureaus and Extranet Providers serve as
conduits to MIAX Members and non-Members that do not have their own
proprietary systems or do not directly connect to MIAX. The Service
Bureaus and Extranet Providers recover the cost of the MIAX Network
Connectivity fee

from their customers, resulting in a lower overall fee to Members and
non-Members using the services of such third party providers.
    The non-Member Network Connectivity fee for the first month of
trading on MIAX will be assessed on a pro-rata basis in the same manner
as the Member Network Connectivity fee described above.
c. Pass-Through of External Connectivity Fees
    MIAX will assess External Connectivity fees to Members and non-
Members that establish connections with MIAX through a third-party.
Fees charged to MIAX by third-party external vendors on behalf of a
Member or non-Member connecting to MIAX (including cross-connects),\9\
will be passed through to the Member or non-Member. External
Connectivity fees include one-time set-up fees and monthly charges
charged to MIAX by a third-party.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ A ``cross-connect'' occurs when the affected third-party
system is sited at the same data center where MIAX systems are
sited, and the third-party connects to MIAX through the data center,
rather than connecting directly to MIAX outside of the data center.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The purpose of the External Connectivity fee is to recoup costs
incurred by MIAX in establishing connectivity with external vendors
acting on behalf of a Member or non-Member. MIAX will only pass-through
the actual costs it is charged by the third-party external vendors.
d. Port Fees
    Once network connectivity is established, MIAX will assess fees for
access and services used by Members, Service Bureaus and Extranet
Providers. Known as ``Ports'', MIAX provides two types: a Financial
Information Exchange (``FIX'') Port,\10\ which allows Members to
electronically send orders in all products traded on the Exchange and
the MIAX Express Interface (``MEI'') \11\ Port, which allows Market
Makers to submit electronic quotes to the Exchange. MIAX will assess
monthly MEI Port fees on Market Makers based upon the number of MIAX
matching engines \12\ used by the Market Maker. Each Market Maker will
be allocated two MEI quoting ports for each matching engine they use.
For example, a Market Maker that wishes to make markets in just one
symbol would require the two MEI quoting ports in a single matching
engine; a Market Maker wishing to make markets in all symbols traded on
MIAX would require the two MEI quoting ports in each of the Exchange's
matching engines. The FIX Port and the MEI Port each include access to
MIAX's primary and secondary data centers and its disaster recovery
center. The proposed monthly Port Fees described below are scheduled to
be implemented beginning January 1, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ A FIX Port is an interface with MIAX systems that enables
the Port user (typically an EEM or a Market Maker) to submit orders
electronically to MIAX.
    \11\ MIAX Express Interface is a connection to MIAX systems that
enables Market Makers to submit electronic quotes to MIAX.
    \12\ A ``matching engine'' is a part of the MIAX electronic
system that processes options quotes and trades on a symbol-by-
symbol basis. Some matching engines will process option classes with
multiple root symbols, and other matching engines will be dedicated
to one single option root symbol (for example, options on SPY will
be processed by one single matching engine that is dedicated only to
SPY options). A particular root symbol may only be assigned to a
single designated matching engine. A particular root symbol may not
be assigned to multiple matching engines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

FIX Port Fees
    MIAX will assess monthly FIX Port fees on Members based upon the
number of FIX Ports used by the Member submitting orders to MIAX.
Although one FIX Port gives access to all products traded on MIAX, some
Members may choose to use more than one FIX Port. MIAX will assess a
monthly FIX Port fee of $250.00 for the first FIX Port provided to the
user, $150.00 per FIX Port for the second through fifth FIX Port
provided to the user (if applicable), and $50.00 per FIX Port for the
sixth FIX Port and any additional FIX Ports provided to the user (if
applicable). MIAX's monthly FIX Port fees are comparable to the Order
Entry Port Fee charged by PHLX ($500 per month per mnemonic with no
discount for multiple Ports), which includes a fee for assigning and
maintaining mnemonics. MIAX charges a separate fee for assigning and
maintaining mnemonics (known as Member Participant Identifier or
``MPID''). Taken together, the MIAX monthly FIX Port and the MPID fees
are less than the PHLX's monthly Order Entry Port Fee.
MEI Port Fees
    MIAX will assess a monthly MEI Port fee of $1,000.00 for the first
matching engine on which the Market Maker has the two ports, $500.00
each for the second through fifth matching engines on which the Market
Maker has the two ports (if applicable), and $250.00 each for the sixth
matching engine and any additional matching engines on which the Market
Maker has the two ports (if applicable).
    MEI Port fees will be capped at $1,000 per month per Market Maker
until the first full calendar month during which MIAX lists and trades
options overlying at least 100 underlying securities. Once MIAX begins
listing and trading options overlying at least 100 underlying
securities, MIAX will assess MEI Port fees as described above. MEI Port
fees will be assessed for the entire month during which MIAX begins
trading, regardless of the number of trading days that have already
occurred during such month prior to the commencement of trading on
MIAX. MEI Port fees will be assessed on a month-by-month basis.
e. MPID Fees
    MIAX will assess monthly Member Participant Identifier (``MPID'')
\13\ fees on EEMs, based upon the number of MPIDs assigned to a
particular EEM in a given month. EEMs will be assessed a monthly MPID
fee of $200.00 for the first MPID assigned, $100.00 each for the second
through fifth MPID assigned, and $50.00 each for the sixth MPID and any
additional MPIDs assigned. MIAX assess MPID fees to cover the
administrative costs it incurs in assigning and managing these
identifiers for each EEM. As discussed above, MIAX's monthly MPID fee
together with its FIX Port fee are similar to and lower than the PHLX's
monthly Order Entry Port fee. The proposed monthly MPID Fees described
above are scheduled to be implemented beginning January 1, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ An MPID is a code used in the MIAX system to identify the
participant to MIAX and to the participant's Clearing Member
respecting trades executed on MIAX. Participants may use more than
one MPID.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    MIAX believes that its proposal to amend its Fee Schedule is
consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act \14\ in general, and furthers
the objectives of Sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act \15\ in
particular, in that it is an equitable allocation of reasonable fees
and other charges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes its one-time Membership Application fees are
reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory. As described in
the Purpose section, the one-time application fees are comparable to
application fees in place at other options exchanges and are designed
to recover costs associated with the processing of such applications.
Market Maker applicants are charged slightly more than EEM applicants
because of the additional work involved in processing a Market Maker's
application. MIAX believes it is

reasonable and equitable to waive the fee to applicants who apply for
membership on or before January 31, 2013. The waiver of such fees
provides incentives to interested applicants to apply early for MIAX
membership, which provides MIAX with potential order flow and liquidity
providers as it begins operations. The waiver will apply equally to all
applicants.
    The Exchange believes its Trading Permit fees are reasonable,
equitable and not unfairly discriminatory. The Trading Permit fees are
lower than comparable fees at other exchanges as described in the
Purpose section above. The differentiation between Trading Permit fees
charged to EEMs and Market Makers reflects the additional Exchange
access provided to Market Makers and the additional technical,
regulatory and administrative costs associated with Market Makers' use
of the Exchange and its services.
    MIAX believes its API and Network Testing and Certification fees
are a reasonable allocation of its costs and expenses among its Members
and other persons using its facilities since it is recovering the costs
associated with providing such infrastructure testing and certification
services. MIAX believes it is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory to assess different API and Network Testing and
Certification fees to EEMs and Market Makers. The interface between
Market Maker quoting software and MIAX systems is assessed higher API
and Network Testing and Certification fees because the Market Maker
software interface is more complex and has more functionality to
validate than the EEM's software interface requiring an increased level
of support and expertise. MIAX therefore believes that the higher
Member API and Network Testing and Certification fees applicable to
Market Makers are not unfairly discriminatory.
    Additionally, MIAX believes it is reasonable, equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory to assess different API and Network Testing and
Certification fees to Members and non-Members. The higher fee charged
to non-Members reflects the greater amount of time spent by MIAX
employees testing and certifying non-Members. It has been MIAX's
experience that Member testing takes less time than non-Member testing
because Members have more experience testing these systems with
exchanges; generally fewer questions and issues arise during the
testing and certification process. Also, with respect to API testing
and certification because third party vendors and Service Bureaus are
redistributing data and reselling services to other Members and market
participants the number and types of scenarios that need to be tested
are more numerous and complex than those tested and certified for
Members. In addition, MIAX believes it is reasonable, equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory to assess non-Members a discounted Network
Testing and Certification Fee for additional connections because each
connection will be used by different customers of the non-Member
Service Bureaus and Extranet Providers and will need to be individually
tested requiring more Exchange resources for testing and certification.
Members will not be charged for additional connections because
additional network testing and certification will generally not be
necessary since the additional connections will be from the same source
and will have the same internal technology.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed Connectivity Fees in
general constitute an equitable allocation of fees, and are not
unfairly discriminatory, because they allow the Exchange to recover
costs associated with offering access through the network connections
and access and services through the Ports, responding to customer
requests, configuring MIAX systems, programming API user specifications
and administering the various services. Access to MIAX market will be
offered on fair and non-discriminatory terms. The proposed Connectivity
Fees are also expected to offset the costs MIAX incurs in maintaining,
and implementing ongoing improvements to the trading systems, including
connectivity costs, costs incurred on gateway software and hardware
enhancements and resources dedicated to gateway development, quality
assurance, and technology support. The Exchange believes that its
proposed fees are reasonable in that they are competitive with those
charged by other exchanges. MIAX assesses a higher fee to Service
Bureaus and Extranet Providers than to Members to reflect the fact that
Service Bureaus and Extranet Providers serve as conduits to MIAX
Members and/or non-Members that do not have their own proprietary
systems or do not directly connect to MIAX. For the one monthly Network
Connectivity Fee charged by MIAX, Service Bureaus and Extranet Provider
may in turn provide connectivity to a number of Members and/or non-
Members. The Service Bureaus and Extranet Providers recover the cost of
the MIAX Network Connectivity Fee, plus a premium, from their
customers, which can still result in a lower overall fee to each Member
and/or non-Member using the services of such third party providers. In
allocating its costs among Members and users of its services, MIAX
believes it is equitable to seek to recover a greater portion of those
costs from Service Bureaus and Extranet Providers who profit from the
reselling of those Network Connectivity services.
    MIAX believes it is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory to pass-through External Connectivity fees to Members
and non-Members that establish connections with MIAX through a third-
party. MIAX will only pass-through the actual costs it is charged by
third-party external vendors. MIAX believes it is reasonable and
equitable to recover costs charged it on behalf of a Member or non-
Member that establishes connections with MIAX through a third party.
    MIAX believes it is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory to assess FIX and MEI Port Fees on Members who use such
services--the FIX Port enables Members to submit orders electronically
to the Exchange for processing and the MEI Port enables Market Makers
to submit quotes to the Exchange for processing. The amount charged for
the MEI Port is higher because it is more complex and has more
functionality than the FIX Port. Therefore, MIAX believes the higher
fee for the MEI Port is not unfairly discriminatory. The Exchange
believes that its proposed fees are reasonable in that they are
competitive with those charged by other exchanges.
    The Exchange believes its fees for MPIDs are reasonable, equitable
and not unfairly discriminatory in that they apply to all EEMs assigned
MPID equally and allow the Exchange to recover operational and
administrative costs in assigning and maintaining such services. The
Exchange believes that its proposed fees are reasonable in that they
are competitive with those charged by other exchanges.
    The Exchange believes that it is appropriate to include in this fee
filing fees being assessed on non-Members such as the Connectivity fees
and the API and Network Testing and Certification fees described above.
Recent amendments to paragraph (A) of Section 19(b)(3) \16\ of the
Exchange Act now allow all self-regulatory organization rule proposals
establishing or changing dues, fees or other charges to become
immediately effective upon filing regardless of whether such dues, fees
or other charges are imposed on

members of the self-regulatory organization, non-members, or both.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Exchange notes that it operates in a highly
competitive market in which market participants can readily favor
competing venues. In such an environment, the Exchange must establish
fees that are competitive with other exchanges. For the reasons
described above, the Exchange believes that the proposed amendments to
the MIAX Options Fee Schedule appropriately reflect this competitive
environment.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Unilateral action by MIAX in
establishing fees for services provided to its Members and others using
its facilities will not have an impact on competition. As a new entrant
in the already highly competitive environment for equity options
trading, MIAX does not have the market power necessary to set prices
for services that are unreasonable or unfairly discriminatory in
violation of the Exchange Act. MIAX's proposed fees for Membership and
Systems Connectivity, as described herein, are comparable to and
generally lower than fees charged by other options exchanges for the
same or similar services.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited or received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.\17\ 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 should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-MIAX-2012-05 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-MIAX-2012-05. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make publicly available. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-MIAX-2012-05 and should be
submitted on or before February 8, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\18\
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-00967 Filed 1-17-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: November 12, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 219)]
[Notices]
[Page 66897-66899]
[DOCID:fr12no08-87]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0046; FRL-8386-8]

Notice of Receipt of Several Pesticide Petitions Filed for
Residues of Pesticide Chemicals in or on Various Commodities

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the Agency's receipt of several initial
filing of pesticide petitions proposing the establishment or
modification of regulations for residues of pesticide chemicals in or
on various commodities

DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 12, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number and the pesticide petition number (PP) of interest as shown
in the body of this document, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket Facility's normal hours of operation (8:30
a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays).
Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. The Docket Facility telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to the docket ID number and the
pesticide petition number of interest as shown in the body of this
document. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the docket without change

and may be made available on-line at http://www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information provided, unless the comment
includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information
(CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through regulations.gov or e-mail. The regulations.gov
website is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not
know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the
body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA
without going through regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit
an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and
other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk
or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the docket index
available at http://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet
and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly
available docket materials are available either in the electronic
docket at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard
copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac
Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The hours of
operation of this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A contact person, with telephone
number and e-mail address, is listed at the end of each pesticide
petition summary. You may also reach each contact person by mail at
Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division (7511P), Office of
Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.

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.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
    This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular
entity, consult the person listed at the end of the pesticide petition
summary of interest.

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

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
    3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to achieve environmental
justice, the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of any group,
including minority and/or low-income populations, in the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies. To help address potential environmental justice issues, the
Agency seeks information on any groups or segments of the population
who, as a result of their location, cultural practices, or other
factors, may have atypical or disproportionately high and adverse human
health impacts or environmental effects from exposure to the pesticides
discussed in this document, compared to the general population.

II. What Action is the Agency Taking?

     EPA is announcing its receipt of several pesticide petitions filed
under section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA),
21 U.S.C. 346a, proposing the establishment or modification of
regulations in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of pesticide chemicals in
or on various food commodities. EPA has determined that the pesticide
petitions described in this document contain the data or information
prescribed in FFDCA section 408(d)(2); however, EPA has not fully
evaluated the sufficiency of the submitted data at this time or whether
the data support granting of the pesticide petitions. Additional data
may be needed before EPA can make a final determination on these
pesticide petitions.
     Pursuant to 40 CFR 180.7(f), a summary of each of the petitions
that are the subject of this notice, prepared by the petitioner, is
included in a docket EPA has created for each rulemaking. The docket
for each of the petitions is

available on-line at http://www.regulations.gov.
    As specified in FFDCA section 408(d)(3), (21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3)),
EPA is publishing notice of the petition so that the public has an
opportunity to comment on this request for the establishment or
modification of regulations for residues of pesticides in or on food
commodities. Further information on the petition may be obtained
through the petition summary referenced in this unit.

A. New Exemption from a Tolerance

    1. PP 8F7327. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0749). Isagro, S.p.A., Via Caldera
21, fabbricato D, la 3, Milano, Italy, proposes to establish an
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of the
fungicide, Trichoderma gamsii (strain ICC 080), in or on all food/feed
commodities. Because this petition is a request for an exemption from
the requirement of a tolerance without numerical limitations, no
analytical method is required. Contact: Susanne Cerrelli, (703) 308-
8077<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    2. PP 8F7326. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0750). Isagro, S.p.A., Via Caldera
21, fabbricato D, la 3, Milano, Italy, proposes to establish an
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of the
fungicide, Trichoderma asperellum (strain ICC 012), in or on all food/
feed commodities. Because this petition is a request for an exemption
from the requirement of a tolerance without numerical limitations, no
analytical method is required. Contact: Susanne Cerrelli, (703) 308-
8077<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
B. Amendment to an Existing Tolerance

    3. PP 8F7376. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0606). Luxembourg-Pamol, Inc., 5100
Poplar Ave., Suite 2700, Memphis, TN 38137, proposes to amend the
tolerance in 40 CFR 180.1210 for residues of the fungicide, phosphorous
acid and its ammonium, sodium, and potassium salts, in or on citrus at
35,600 parts per million (ppm). Contact: John Fournier,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Agricultural commodities, Feed additives,
Food additives, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    Dated: October 27, 2008.
Janet L. Andersen,
Director, Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. E8-26479 Filed 11-10-08; 8:45 am]

Billing Code 6560-50-S