[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 98 (Friday, May 20, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30852-30855]
[FR Doc No: 2022-10853]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 82

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0698; FRL-7826.1-3-OAR]
RIN 2060-AV31

Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Listing of Substitutes Under
the Significant New Alternatives Policy Program; Withdrawal of Proposed
Rule

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal and partial withdrawal.

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

SUMMARY: On October 6, 2021, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
issued a supplemental proposed rulemaking under the Significant New
Alternatives Policy program to list certain substitutes to ozone-
depleting substances in the foam blowing sector, extruded polystyrene:
Boardstock and billet end-use, as acceptable, subject to narrowed use
limits, from the effective date of a subsequent final rule until
January 1, 2023. This followed EPA's June 12, 2020, initial proposal
which proposed to list three foam blowing agents, which are
hydrofluorocarbon blends, as acceptable. Taking into consideration
information available to EPA since issuance of that initial proposal,
EPA proposed narrowed use limits and time-limited use of the
substitutes in the supplemental proposal. Based on further information
available to EPA, EPA is now withdrawing the proposed listings for the
three foam blowing agents described in the initial and supplemental
proposals. This document summarizes the proposed listings and provides
an explanation for the Agency's decision not to finalize the proposed
actions.

DATES: The U.S. EPA is withdrawing the proposed rule published on
October 6, 2021 (86 FR 55549; FRL-7826.1-02-OAR); and is partially
withdrawing the proposed rule published on June 12, 2020 (85 FR 35874;
FRL-10009-66-OAR), by withdrawing the listings described in the table
(``SUMMARY OF PROPOSED NEW LISTINGS FOR XPS FOAM BLOWING AGENTS'')
published at 85 FR 35888-35889 on June 12, 2020, as of May 20, 2022.

ADDRESSES: EPA established a docket for this action under Docket ID No.
EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0698. All documents in the docket are listed on the
http://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some
information may not be publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business
Information (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
electronically through http://www.regulations.gov.
    Out of an abundance of caution for members of the public and our
staff, the EPA Docket Center and Reading Room are closed to the public,
with limited exceptions, to reduce the risk of transmitting COVID-19.
Our Docket Center staff will continue to provide remote customer
service via email, phone, and webform. For further information on the
EPA Docket Center services and the current status, please visit us
online at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Feather, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Stratospheric Protection Division; telephone number
202-564-1230; or email address: [email protected]. You may also
visit our website at https://www.epa.gov/ozone-layer-protection for
further information.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, whenever ``we,''
``us,'' ``the Agency,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. Acronyms that
are used in this rulemaking that may be helpful include:

AIM Act--American Innovation and Manufacturing Act
CAA--Clean Air Act
CBI--Confidential Business Information
CFR--Code of Federal Regulations
CO2--Carbon dioxide
EPA--Environmental Protection Agency
FR--Federal Register
GWP--Global Warming Potential
HCFC--Hydrochlorofluorocarbon
HCFO--Hydrochlorofluoroolefin
HFC--Hydrofluorocarbon
HFO--Hydrofluoroolefin
NAICS--North American Industrial Classification System
NPRM--Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
ODS--Ozone-depleting substances
SNAP--Significant New Alternatives Policy
XPS--Extruded Polystyrene: Boardstock and Billet

Table of Contents

I. General Information
    A. Does this action apply to me?
    B. Why is EPA issuing this withdrawal of the proposed actions?
    C. What is the Agency's authority for this action?
II. Background
    A. 2020 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)
    B. 2021 Supplemental Proposal
    C. Comments Received
    D. Additional Information That EPA Considered
III. How does EPA intend to proceed?
IV. Impact Analysis
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action is directed to the public in general and may be of
particular interest to regulated entities under the following North
American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes:

 All Other Basic Organic Chemical Manufacturing (NAICS 325199)
 Polystyrene Foam Product Manufacturing (NAICS 326140)

B. Why is EPA issuing this withdrawal of the proposed actions?

    This document serves the following purposes:
    1. It announces to the public that EPA is withdrawing proposed
listings under EPA's Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program
for three foam blowing agents for which the Agency no longer intends to
issue a final rule; and
    2. It officially terminates the ongoing rulemaking activity, which
allows the Agency to close out the individual rulemaking entry for
these actions that appear in EPA's Semiannual Regulatory Agenda.

C. What is the Agency's authority for this action?

    EPA's SNAP program implements section 612 of the Clean Air Act
(CAA), including section 612(c) provisions concerning rulemakings that
restrict replacing ozone-depleting substances (ODS) with any substitute
that the Administrator determines may present adverse effects to human
health or the environment where the Administrator has identified an
alternative that (1) reduces the overall risk to human health and the
environment and (2) is currently or potentially available. Section
612(c) also requires EPA to publish lists of those substitutes which
are unacceptable or acceptable for specific uses. Section 612(d) grants
the right to any person to petition EPA to add a substance to, or
delete a substance from, the lists published in accordance with section
612(c). Section 612(e) also requires producers of substitutes for class
I ODS to notify the Agency of introductions of these substances into
interstate commerce for significant new uses, along with unpublished
health and safety studies. The regulations for the SNAP program are
promulgated at 40 CFR part 82, subpart G, and the Agency's process for
reviewing SNAP submissions is described in regulations at 40 CFR
82.180. For additional information on the SNAP program, visit the SNAP
portion of EPA's Ozone Layer Protection website at www.epa.gov/snap.
Copies of the full lists of acceptable substitutes for ODS in all
industrial sectors are available at www.epa.gov/snap/substitutes-sector. For more information on the Agency's process for administering
the SNAP program or criteria for evaluation of substitutes, refer to
the initial SNAP rulemaking published March 18, 1994 (59 FR 13044),
codified at 40 CFR part 82, subpart G. SNAP decisions and the
appropriate Federal Register citations are found at: www.epa.gov/snap/snap-regulations. Substitutes listed as

unacceptable; acceptable, subject to narrowed use limits; or
acceptable, subject to use conditions, are also listed in the
appendices to 40 CFR part 82, subpart G.

II. Background

A. 2020 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)

    As one component of the June 12, 2020, NPRM (85 FR 35874) (``2020
NPRM''),\1\ EPA, as noted in a table titled ``Summary of Proposed New
Listings for XPS Foam Blowing Agents'' on 85 FR 35888-35889, proposed
to list three blends containing hydrofluorocarbon (HFC)-134a as
acceptable foam blowing agents in extruded polystyrene: Boardstock and
billet (XPS): Blends of 40 to 52 percent HFC-134a by weight and the
remainder hydrofluoroolefin (HFO)-1234ze(E); blends of 40 to 52 percent
HFC-134a with 40 to 60 percent HFO-1234ze(E) and 10 to 20 percent each
water and carbon dioxide (CO2) by weight; and blends with a
maximum of 51 percent HFC-134a, 17 to 41 percent HFC-152a, up to 20
percent CO2, and 1 to 13 percent water. EPA proposed to list
those three specific blends of HFC-134a as acceptable in XPS, stating
that ``[t]hese blends have higher [global warming potentials] GWPs and
are otherwise comparable or lower in risk than other alternatives
listed as acceptable; however, EPA is taking this action because the
Agency believes that other acceptable alternatives are not generally
available for most needs under this end-use.'' 85 FR 35888.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Other provisions of that proposal related to refrigeration
and air conditioning and to fire suppression were finalized in a
rule issued May 6, 2021 (86 FR 24444).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA also stated in the 2020 NPRM that, for substitutes to be
``available'' in the XPS end-use, they must be capable of blowing foam
that meets the technical needs of XPS products including density and
ability to meet testing requirements of building codes and standards,
such as for thermal efficiency, compressive strength, and flame and
smoke generation (85 FR 35888). Further, EPA noted that the company
that initially submitted the three blends to the SNAP program for
review indicated their difficulty meeting requirements for insulation
value (``R-value'') with neat \2\ acceptable blowing agents such as
HFO-1234ze(E), HFC-152a, and CO2.\3\ The submitter indicated
that if in some cases it could meet R-value requirements with those
neat blowing agents, these alternatives were not able to meet other
requirements such as compressive strength, density and thickness, or
fire test results. The submitter also identified challenges with
meeting code requirements for XPS products manufactured with flammable
substitutes (e.g., HFC-152a, light saturated hydrocarbons C3-C6, and
methyl formate) and provided examples of failed test results \4\ (85 FR
35888).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Individual, unblended blowing agents.
    \3\ DuPont, 2019. December 17, 2019 Letter from DuPont
Performance Building Solutions to EPA. Docket ID EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-
0698-0008.
    \4\ DuPont, 2019. Op. cit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA stated that it appeared that only one of the substitutes that
the Agency believed would be available for use in XPS foam as of
January 1, 2021 at the time of the final rule issued July 20, 2015 (80
FR 42870) (``2015 Rule''),\5\ was in fact available, and that it likely
could only be used to meet the needs for some portion of the XPS foams
market.\6\ Based on concerns about ensuring that the needs of the full
XPS foams market in the United States could be met and not limiting the
choice of acceptable substitutes to only one option, EPA proposed to
list three additional blowing agent options for XPS that have been
proven to work for this end-use.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The 2015 Rule, among other things, changed the listings for
certain HFCs and blends from acceptable to unacceptable in various
end-uses in the aerosols, refrigeration and air conditioning, and
foam blowing sectors. After a challenge to the 2015 Rule, the United
States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (``the
court'') issued a partial vacatur of the 2015 Rule ``to the extent
it requires manufacturers to replace HFCs with a substitute
substance'' (see Mexichem Fluor, Inc. v. EPA, 866 F.3d 451, 462
(D.C. Cir. 2017)) and remanded the rule to the Agency for further
proceedings. The court also upheld EPA's listing changes as being
reasonable and not ``arbitrary and capricious.'' See Mexichem Fluor
v. EPA, 866 F.3d at 462-63.
    \6\ In the 2020 NPRM, EPA further stated that the set of
products that may be able to be manufactured with that substitute,
HFC-152a, would account for a minority of the current market for XPS
(85 FR 35888, footnote 54). As discussed further below, information
available to the Agency since that proposal indicates that the
statement that HFC-152a was being used alone was likely incorrect.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. 2021 Supplemental Proposal

    EPA issued a supplemental proposal on October 6, 2021 (86 FR
55549), because of new information on the availability of substitutes
which, among other things, included information on the introduction of
a new substitute, blends of 10 to 99 percent by weight HFO-1336mzz(Z)
and the remainder HFC-152a, which EPA listed as acceptable for use in
XPS on December 11, 2020 (85 FR 79863). In the 2020 NPRM, EPA proposed
to list the three HFC blends for use in XPS as acceptable. In the
supplemental proposal, EPA took another approach by proposing to list
these three HFC blends as acceptable, subject to narrowed use limits,
from the effective date of any final rule to January 1, 2023.

C. Comments Received

    EPA received comments on the initial and supplemental proposals
from entities with various interests in foam blowing agents and foam
insulation, including industry organizations for manufacturers of
insulation other than XPS, chemical producers, manufacturers of XPS,
manufacturers of other types of foam insulation, and environmental
organizations. The two proposals addressed similar issues and similar
issues were raised in public comment, with some updated information
related to the supplemental proposal. The comments are briefly
summarized below and are available in full in Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-
0698.
    Multiple commenters requested that EPA withdraw the proposal and/or
the supplemental proposal. Commenters raised concerns with the proposed
listings, with some stating that there are other alternatives
commercially available internationally with lower GWP for use in XPS
boardstock. Commenters also provided information on the commercial
availability in the United States of new XPS products using blowing
agents with GWPs lower than 150 from all U.S. manufacturers of XPS. One
major chemical producer added that their lower-GWP replacement foam
blowing agent for HFC-134a used in the XPS end-use has been fully
commercialized and has been manufactured in the United States since
2014. They stated that since then, this product has been adopted by a
number of key XPS foam manufacturers and provides customers significant
GWP-reduction benefits in a market that will continue to value and
require such benefits. A manufacturer of XPS stated that in Europe, a
large manufacturer of XPS with CO2 asserted that
CO2 as a blowing agent is clearly a viable technology with
no supply barrier. A major chemical producer stated that HFO-1234ze(E)
has been used commercially for many years and is used in the
manufacture of XPS products by several firms in several countries
around the globe where there are regulations requiring the use of safer
blowing agents, including a large manufacturer of XPS in Europe. An
environmental organization provided information on European products
that contain CO2 and various blends of either CO2
or HFO-1234ze(E), including products from a European XPS manufacturer.
Some commenters stated that all three U.S. manufacturers of XPS are now
manufacturing products using lower-GWP blowing agents.

    One commenter, a manufacturer of XPS, and the company that
submitted the three blends to the SNAP program for review, had
supported the initial proposal of listing the blends as acceptable, and
in the supplemental proposal supported the option of listing the blends
as acceptable, subject to narrowed use limits, for use in XPS until
January 1, 2023. That company stated that suitable alternatives with
sufficient performance parameters were not available, that these
listings are necessary to bridge the transition to such alternatives,
and that the near-term supply of alternatives was uncertain.

D. Additional Information That EPA Considered

    After issuing the supplemental proposal, EPA listed three more
substitutes with lower-GWP as acceptable for use in XPS (January 20,
2022; 87 FR 3037). The three substitutes are: Blends of 10 to 90
percent HFO-1234ze(E) by weight and the remainder
hydrochlorofluoroolefin (HCFO)-1233zd(E); blends of 10 to 90 percent
HFO-1234ze(E) by weight and the remainder HFC-152a; and blends of zero
to 100 percent HFO-1234ze(E), zero to 70 percent methyl formate, zero
to 60 percent HFC-152a, zero to 60 percent CO2, and zero to
60 percent water. At least one of the three U.S. manufacturers of XPS
is using one of these substitutes in manufacturing its products.

III. How does EPA intend to proceed?

    Based on our consideration of these comments and the emergence of
new listings of substitutes for this end-use, we believe lower risk
alternatives are available and technically feasible. Accordingly, an
acceptable listing, as proposed in the 2020 NPRM, is not appropriate,
and a rulemaking effort for a limited duration, as proposed in the 2021
Supplemental Proposal, is not warranted. The information above
demonstrates that alternatives are available and technically feasible
that pose overall risk to human health and the environment comparable
to or lower than that of other acceptable substitutes for use in XPS.
The blends of HFC-134a described above remain unacceptable, as listed
in appendix U to 40 CFR part 82 subpart G. This notice serves to
provide transparency and clearly notify the public and those with
particular interest of how we intend to proceed with respect to these
listings.
    For these reasons, EPA is withdrawing the proposed rule published
on October 6, 2021 (86 FR 55549; FRL-7826.1-02-OAR), along with
withdrawing the portions of the proposed rule published on June 12,
2020 (85 FR 35874; FRL-10009-66-OAR), that relate to listing as
acceptable the three HFC blends for use in XPS.

IV. Impact Analysis

    Because the EPA is not promulgating any regulatory requirements,
there are no compliance costs or impacts associated with this action.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action does not establish new regulatory requirements. Hence,
the requirements of other regulatory statutes and Executive Orders that
generally apply to rulemakings (e.g., the Unfunded Mandate Reform Act)
do not apply to this action.

Michael S. Regan,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2022-10853 Filed 5-19-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 125 (Wednesday, June 29, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42388-42390]
[FR Doc No: 2016-15360]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-78149; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2016-085]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Allow Listed Companies Not Currently Subject to Nasdaq's All-Inclusive
Annual Listing Fee To Opt In to That Fee Program for 2017

June 24, 2016.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on June 10, 2016, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II, and III, below, which Items have been prepared by the
Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments
on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to allow listed companies not currently
subject to Nasdaq's all-inclusive annual listing fee to opt in to that
fee program for 2017. The changes proposed herein are effective upon
filing.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://nasdaq.cchwallstreet.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 aspects of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    Effective January 1, 2015, Nasdaq adopted an all-inclusive annual
listing fee, which simplifies billing and provides transparency and
certainty to companies as to the annual cost of listing.\3\ This new
fee structure was designed, primarily, to address customer complaints
about the number and, in some cases, the variable nature of certain of
Nasdaq's listing fees. It also provides benefits to Nasdaq, including
eliminating the multiple invoices that were sent to a company each year
and providing more certainty as to revenue.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73647 (November 19,
2014), 79 FR 70232 (November 25, 2014) (SR-NASDAQ-2014-087).
    \4\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While this new fee structure will become operative for all listed
companies in 2018, listed companies were allowed to elect to be subject
to the all-inclusive annual listing fee effective January 1, 2015, and
were provided certain incentives to do so.\5\ In the second half of
2015, Nasdaq offered listed companies that did not choose to
participate in the all-inclusive annual fee program for 2015 to do so
effective January 1, 2016. The incentive offered to these companies was
similar to the one offered to companies that opted to participate in
the all-inclusive annual fee program for 2015. Companies have reacted
favorably to the new fee program and these incentives.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See IM-5910-1(b)(1) and IM-5920-1(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Nasdaq now proposes to allow currently listed companies that did
not previously opt in to the all-inclusive annual fee program to do so
effective January 1, 2017. Specifically, from June 15, 2016 until
December 31, 2016, Nasdaq will allow companies to opt in to the all-
inclusive annual fee program for 2017. Any company that does so will
not be billed for the next $30,000 in fees for the listing of
additional shares otherwise payable to Nasdaq, regardless of when the
shares were issued. Fees for share issuances that were already billed
at the time the opt-in form is submitted will not be forgiven. Nasdaq
does not believe that this incentive will have an adverse impact on the
amount of funds available for its regulatory programs.
2. Statutory Basis
    Nasdaq believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with
the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\6\ in general, and with
Sections 6(b)(4) and (5) of the Act,\7\ in particular, in that it
provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and
other charges among its members, issuers and other persons using its
facilities, and does not unfairly discriminate between customers,
issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Nasdaq believes that the proposed incentive offered to companies
that elect the all-inclusive annual listing fee starting in 2017 is
reasonable, equitable, and not unfairly discriminatory. This incentive
is available equally to all companies. Moreover, no company is required
to opt in to the all-inclusive annual fee program under this change.
    In addition, as noted above, Nasdaq will accrue benefits from
companies electing the all-inclusive annual listing fee structure.
These benefits include eliminating the multiple invoices that are sent
to a company each year and providing more certainty as to revenue. The
incentive is designed to help Nasdaq capture those benefits sooner,
which is a reasonable and non-discriminatory reason to provide the
incentive to companies.
    Finally, the proposed incentive is consistent with the investor
protection objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \8\ in that it is
designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove
impediments to a free and open market and national market system, and
in general to protect investors and the public interest. Specifically,
the proposed change will not impact the resources available for
Nasdaq's listing compliance program, which helps to assure that listing
standards are properly enforced and investors are protected.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The proposed rule change will not result in any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act, as amended. The market for listing services is
extremely competitive and listed companies may freely choose
alternative venues based on the aggregate fees assessed, and the value
provided by each listing. As such, Nasdaq believes that this proposed
rule change does not encumber the competition for listings with other
listing venues, which are similarly free to set their fees, but rather
reflects the competition between listing venues and will further
enhance such competition.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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: (i)
Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the
protection of investors; or (iii) 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.

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-NASDAQ-2016-085 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2016-085. 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 Number SR-NASDAQ-2016-085 and should
be submitted on or before July 20, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-15360 Filed 6-28-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 175 (Friday, September 9, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 55783-55785]
[FR Doc No: 2011-22028]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2011-0216; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-197-AD;
Amendment 39-16796; AD 2011-18-14]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A.
(EMBRAER) Model ERJ 190 Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This AD results from mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of
another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an
aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as:

    * * * The pylon internal shear pin was found cracked during a
regular check. Further investigation revealed that the failure
occurred due to hydrogen embrittlement. The ANAC [Ag[ecirc]ncia
Nacional de Avia[ccedil][atilde]o Civil] is issuing this [Brazilian]
AD to prevent insufficient strength of the pylon to wing attachment,
which in combination with an engine imbalance caused by a fan blade
out could cause pylon to wing attachment failure and consequent
engine separation.
* * * * *
We are issuing this AD to require actions to correct the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: This AD becomes effective October 14, 2011.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of October 14,
2011.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov or in person at the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cindy Ashforth, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; phone: 425-227-
2768; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on March 14, 2011 (76
FR 13539). That NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states:

    * * * The pylon internal shear pin was found cracked during a
regular check. Further investigation revealed that the failure
occurred due to hydrogen embrittlement. The ANAC is issuing this
[Brazilian] AD to prevent insufficient strength of the pylon to wing
attachment, which in combination with an engine imbalance caused by
a fan blade out could cause pylon to wing attachment failure and
consequent engine separation.
* * * * *
Required actions include replacing pylon shear pins in the rear
outboard and inboard shear pin assembly in the right- and left-hand
pylons with new parts. You may obtain further information by examining
the MCAI in the AD docket.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We considered the comments received.

Request for Further Inspection

    JetBlue requested that, in addition to replacement of the pylon
rear inboard and outboard internal shear pins, a detailed visual
inspection of the pylon rear outboard and inboard external shear pins
should be done to ensure that

the external shear pins have no evidence of corrosion and corrosion
products, or corrosion pitting. JetBlue found external shear pins with
surface corrosion and pitting.
    We disagree with the request. Embraer inspected the suspect
external shear pins from JetBlue and found particles of sealant and
other contaminants embedded in the inner surface, but there was no sign
of corrosion or damage. The material of the external shear pin is
corrosion-resistant stainless steel. No change has been made to the AD
in this regard.

Request To Clarify Service Bulletin Reference

    Embraer requested that paragraph (j) of the NPRM refer to EMBRAER
Service Bulletin 190LIN-54-0001, dated June 21, 2010, rather than
190LIN-54-001.
    We agree with the request and have made the change in paragraph (j)
of this AD.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data, including the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
the AD with the change described previously. We determined that this
change will not increase the economic burden on any operator or
increase the scope of the AD.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
    We might also have required different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow our FAA policies. Any such differences
are highlighted in a NOTE within the AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 73 products of U.S. registry.
We also estimate that it will take about 10 work-hours per product to
comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate
is $85 per work-hour. Required parts will cost about $2,360 per
product. Where the service information lists required parts costs that
are covered under warranty, we have assumed that there will be no
charge for these parts. As we do not control warranty coverage for
affected parties, some parties may incur costs higher than estimated
here. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD to the
U.S. operators to be $234,330, or $3,210 per product.

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 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); 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.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains the NPRM, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The street address for
the Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly
after receipt.

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 AD:

2011-18-14 Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER):
Amendment 39-16796. Docket No. FAA-2011-0216; Directorate Identifier
2010-NM-197-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective October
14, 2011.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to all Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica
S.A. (EMBRAER) Model ERJ 190-100 STD, -100 LR, -100 ECJ, and -100
IGW airplanes; and Model ERJ 190-200 STD, -200 LR, and -200 IGW
airplanes; certificated in any category.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 54:
Nacelles/Pylons.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:
    * * * The pylon internal shear pin was found cracked during a
regular check. Further investigation revealed that the failure
occurred due to hydrogen embrittlement. The ANAC [Ag[ecirc]ncia
Nacional de Avia[ccedil][atilde]o Civil] is issuing this [Brazilian]
AD to prevent insufficient strength of the pylon to wing attachment,
which in combination with an engine imbalance caused by a fan blade
out could cause pylon to wing attachment failure and consequent
engine separation.
* * * * *

Compliance

    (f) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.

Replace Shear Pins

    (g) For Model ERJ 190-100 STD, -100 LR, -100 IGW; and ERJ 190-
200 STD, -200 LR,

and -200 IGW airplanes: Within 3,000 flight hours after the
effective date of this AD, replace the shear pins having part number
(P/N) 190-15178-003 and P/N 190-15181-003 in the rear outboard and
inboard shear pin assembly in the right- and left-hand pylons, with
new shear pins having P/N 190-15178-005 and P/N 190-15181-005,
respectively, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
EMBRAER Service Bulletin 190-54-0010, dated May 19, 2010.
    (h) For Model ERJ 190-100 ECJ airplanes: Within 3,000 flight
hours or within 12 months after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs first, replace the shear pins having P/N 190-15178-
003 and P/N 190-15181-003, in the rear outboard and inboard shear
pin assembly in the right- and left-hand pylons, with new shear pins
having P/N 190-15178-005 and P/N 190-15181-005, respectively, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of EMBRAER Service
Bulletin 190LIN-54-0001, dated June 21, 2010.

FAA AD Differences

    Note 1: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows: The MCAI allows credit for previous installation of
internal shear pins in accordance with EMBRAER 190 Aircraft
Maintenance Manual Task 54-50-00-400, Revision 19, dated July 15,
2010. This AD does not allow credit for this task; however, under
the provisions of paragraph (i) of this AD, we will consider
requests for an alternative method of compliance.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (i) 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: Cindy
Ashforth, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Information may be e-mailed 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. The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this
AD.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.

Related Information

    (j) Refer to MCAI Ag[ecirc]ncia Nacional de
Avia[ccedil][atilde]o Civil (ANAC) Airworthiness Directive 2010-08-
02, dated September 20, 2010; and EMBRAER Service Bulletins 190-54-
0010, dated May 19, 2010, and 190LIN-54-0001, dated June 21, 2010;
for related information.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (k) You must use EMBRAER Service Bulletin 190-54-0010, dated May
19, 2010; or EMBRAER Service Bulletin 190LIN-54-0001, dated June 21,
2010; as applicable; to do the actions required by this AD, unless
the AD specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER), Technical
Publications Section (PC 060), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, 2170--
Putim--12227-901 S[atilde]o Jose dos Campos--SP--BRASIL; telephone
+55 12 3927-5852 or +55 12 3309-0732; fax +55 12 3927-7546; e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.flyembraer.com.
    (3) You may review copies of the service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the 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/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 19, 2011.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2011-22028 Filed 9-8-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: January 13, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 8)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 1715-1716]
[DOCID:fr13ja10-12]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2009-0474; FRL-9100-1]

Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, San
Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing approval of revisions to the San Joaquin
Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) portion of the
California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions were
proposed in the Federal Register on August 14, 2009 and concern oxides
of nitrogen (NOX) and particulate matter (PM) emissions from
boilers of various capacities. We are approving local rules that
regulate these emission sources under the Clean Air Act as amended in
1990 (CAA or the Act).

DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective on February 12, 2010.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established docket number EPA-R09-OAR-2009-0474 for
this action. The index to the docket is available electronically at
http://www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75
Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all documents in the
docket are listed in the index, some information may be publicly
available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material),
and some may not be publicly available in either location (e.g., CBI).
To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment
during normal business hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Idalia Perez, EPA Region IX, (415)
972-3248<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Proposed Action
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
III. EPA Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Proposed Action

    On August 14, 2009 (74 FR 41104), EPA proposed to approve the
following rules into the California SIP.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Local agency                   Rule No.             Rule title             Adopted     Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SJVAPCD...................................         4306  Boilers, Steam Generators and     10/16/08     03/17/09
                                                          Process Heaters--Phase 3.
SJVAPCD...................................         4307  Boilers, Steam Generators and     10/16/08     03/17/09
                                                          Process Heaters--2.0 MMbtu/
                                                          hr to 5.0 MMbtu/hr.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We proposed to approve these rules because we determined that they
complied with the relevant CAA requirements. Our proposed action
contains more information on the rules and our evaluation.

II. Public Comments and EPA Responses

    EPA's proposed action provided a 30-day public comment period.
During this period, we received no comments.

III. EPA Action

    Since publication of the proposed action, we identified two minor
issues regarding Rule 4307 that do not change our assessment that the
submitted rule complies with the relevant CAA requirements.
Nonetheless, revisions to these provisions should be made when the Rule
is next revised.
    We have identified the possibility that some units that are subject
to Rule 4307 do not need exemptions from basic emission limits during
start-up and shutdown periods as long as they are maintained and
operated appropriately. For example, we believe that heater treaters
which rely only on low-NOX burners for compliance are
capable of consistent compliance with the Rule's basic emission limits
during these periods. As a result, Section 5.4 should be revised to
remove the start-up and shutdown exemption period for such devices.
    Currently Section 6.1.4 requires recordkeeping only if the start-up
and shut-down event exceeds the limitations of the duration of such
events in Section 5.4.1 or 5.4.2. EPA recommends that Section 6.1.4 of
Rule 4307 be revised to require records that specify the duration of
all start-up and shut-down periods (at least for units located at Title
V facilities). EPA notes that the limited applicability of the current
version of 6.1.4 may not be appropriate in other rules, particularly
those where periodic or continuous monitoring is required.
    No comments were submitted that change our assessment that the
submitted rules comply with the relevant CAA requirements. Therefore,
as authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, EPA is fully approving
these rules into the California SIP.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely approves State law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by State law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, these rules do not have Tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the State, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on Tribal governments or preempt Tribal law.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action 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. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by March 15, 2010. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements (see section 307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: November 23, 2009.
Laura Yoshii,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.

0
Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart F--California

0
2. Section 52.220, is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(363)(i)(A)(3)
and (4) to read as follows:

Sec.  52.220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (363) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (A) * * *
    (3) Rule 4306, ``Boilers, Steam Generators and Process Heaters--
Phase 3, '' adopted on October 16, 2008.
    (4) Rule 4307, ``Boilers, Steam Generators and Process Heaters--2.0
MMbtu/hr to 5.0 MMbtu/hr,'' adopted on October 16, 2008.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2010-352 Filed 1-12-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P