[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 114 (Tuesday, June 14, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 38601-38604]
[FR Doc No: 2016-13910]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0235; FRL-9946-75]

Chlorantraniliprole; Pesticide Tolerances

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
chlorantraniliprole in or on multiple commodities which are identified
and discussed later in this document. Interregional Research Project
Number 4 (IR-4) requested the tolerances associated with pesticide
petition number (PP) 5E8371, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FFDCA). Additionally, the Agency is amending the existing
tolerance for egg that was inadvertently omitted in a previous action.

DATES: This regulation is effective June 14, 2016. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before August 15, 2016,
and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40
CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0235, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Please review the visitor instructions and
additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Lewis, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; main telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

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

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

    You may access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA's
tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through

the Government Printing Office's e-CFR site at http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl.

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

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0235 in the subject line on the first
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must
be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before
August 15, 2016. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections and
hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for
inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without
prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing
request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0235, by one of
the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html. Additional
instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along with more
information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance

    In the Federal Register of August 26, 2015 (80 FR 51759) (FRL-9931-
74), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP)
5E8371 by Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4), 500 College
Road East, Princeton, NJ 08540. The petition requested that 40 CFR part
180 be amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the
insecticide chlorantraniliprole, 3-bromo-N-[4-chloro-2-methyl-6-
[(methylamino)-carbonyl]phenyl]-1-(3-chloro-2-pyridinyl)-1H-pyrazole-5-
carboxamide, in or on nut, tree, group 14-12 at 0.02 parts per million
(ppm); and fruit, stone, group 12-12 at 2.5 ppm. This petition
additionally requested that 40 CFR 180.628 be amended by revising the
existing tolerance in or on artichoke, globe from 4.0 ppm to 2.0 ppm;
and hop, dried cones from 90 ppm to 40 ppm. Upon establishment of the
tolerances associated with (PP) 5E8371, IR-4 requests to remove the
following existing tolerances in 40 CFR 180.628: Nut, tree, group 14 at
0.04 ppm; pistachio at 0.04 ppm; fruit, stone, group 12-12, except
cherry, chickasaw plum, and damson plum at 4.0 ppm; cherry, sweet at
2.0 ppm; cherry, tart at 2.0 ppm; plum, chickasaw at 2.0 ppm; and plum,
damson at 2.0 ppm. That document referenced a summary of the petition
prepared on behalf of IR-4 by DuPont Crop Protection, the registrant,
which is available in the docket EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0235 at http://www.regulations.gov.
    There were no comments received in response to the notice of
filing.

III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a
food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure.
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and
children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. . .
.''
    Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the
available scientific data and other relevant information in support of
this action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to
make a determination on aggregate exposure for chlorantraniliprole,
consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2).
    In the Federal Register of February 7, 2014 (79 FR 7397) (FRL-9905-
56), EPA established tolerances for residues of chlorantraniliprole in
or on fruit, stone, group 12-12, except cherry, chickasaw plum, and
damson plum at 4.0 ppm; onion, green subgroup 3-07B at 3.0 ppm; peanut,
hay at 90 ppm; and peanut at 0.06 ppm. EPA is relying upon those risk
assessments and the findings made in the February 7, 2014 Federal
Register document in support of this action. The toxicity profile of
chlorantraniliprole has not changed. Moreover, because EPA is simply
lowering the previously assessed tolerance levels (where the EPA
assumed tolerance-level residues for all crops and including the tree
nut group 14-12 at 0.02 ppm), the previous dietary estimates also do
not change as a result of this action. Therefore, the previously
published risk assessments that supported the establishment of those
tolerances remain valid.
    The petitioner requested to lower currently established tolerances
for residues of chlorantraniliprole in/on hops dried cones from 90 ppm
to 40 ppm and globe artichoke from 4.0 ppm to 2.0 ppm in order to
harmonize with the Codex maximum residue limits (MRLs). Crop field
trial studies were submitted for hops and globe artichoke that indicate
lowering these tolerances are appropriate and will support the existing
U.S. registrations. The petitioner also requested to lower the existing
tolerance of 4.0 ppm for stone fruit group 12-12, except cherry,
chickasaw plum, and damson plum and remove the cherry, sweet; cherry,
tart; plum, chickasaw; and plum, damson tolerances established at 2.0
ppm and establish a tolerance for stone fruit crop group 12-12 at 2.5
ppm to align with the Canadian MRL. EPA has determined that the
existing residue chemistry data support this new tolerance level, which
is lower than the current tolerances for some commodities and higher
for others. Further, the petitioner requested to convert the tree nut
crop group 14 to tree nut crop group 14-12 and to remove the tolerance
for pistachio to lower the tolerance for the group (and for the now-
included pistachio commodity) from 0.40 ppm to 0.02 ppm to harmonize
the U.S. tolerance with the Codex and Canadian MRLs. EPA has determined
that the existing residue chemistry data support the request for crop
group conversion and for lowering the tolerance level.

    Furthermore, EPA issued a final rule in the Federal Register of
September 18, 2013, concerning the addition of certain commodities to
the 40 CFR 180.628. The EPA determined that the tolerance level for egg
should be increased from 0.2 ppm to 1.0 ppm, and EPA assessed egg using
the tolerance of 1.0 ppm in 2013 as well as in February 2014. This was
inadvertently omitted from the table in the 2013 Final Rule. Therefore,
this document corrects that omission.
    Therefore, EPA relies upon the findings made in the February 7,
2014, Federal Register document, as well as the review of the
additional globe artichoke and dried cones hop field trial data and
existing residue chemistry data in support of this rule. EPA concludes
that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the
general population, or to infants and children from aggregate exposure
to chlorantraniliprole residues.
    For a detailed discussion of the aggregate risk assessments and
determination of safety for these tolerances, please refer to the
February 7, 2014, Federal Register document and its supporting
documents, available at http://www.regulations.gov in docket ID number
EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0235. Further information about EPA's determination
that an updated risk assessment was not necessary may be found in the
document, ``Chlorantraniliprole (DPX-E2Y45): Petition for Updating Crop
Group Tolerances for Nut Tree Group 14-12 and Fruit Stone Group 12-12,
and Amending Established Tolerances for Chlorantraniliprole in/on
Artichoke Globe and Hop Dried Cones.'' in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2013-0235.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    Adequate enforcement methodology, liquid chromatography mass
spectrometry/mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS); Method uPont-11374, is
available to enforce the tolerance expression.
    The method may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry
Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD
20755-5350; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
B. International Residue Limits

    In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations
Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food
standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain
the reasons for departing from the Codex level.
    Based on the data supporting the petition, EPA has harmonized
chlorantraniliprole tolerances in or on artichoke, globe at 2.0 ppm;
hop, dried cones at 40 ppm; and nut, tree, group 14-12 at 0.02 ppm with
established Codex MRLs.

C. International Trade Considerations

    In this rulemaking, EPA is reducing the tolerances for hops, dried
cones from 90 ppm to 40 ppm; globe artichoke from 4.0 ppm to 2.0 ppm;
lowering the existing tolerance of 4.0 ppm for stone fruit group 12-12,
except cherry, chickasaw plum, and damson plum and establishing a lower
tolerance for stone fruit crop group 12-12 at 2.5 ppm; and converting
and lowering the tree nut crop group 14 and pistachio tolerances to
tree nut crop group 14-12 at 0.40 ppm to 0.02 ppm. The petitioner
requested these reductions in order to harmonize with Codex and
Canadian MRLs. The reduction is appropriate based on available data and
residue levels resulting from registered use patterns.
    In accordance with the World Trade Organization's (WTO) Sanitary
and Phytosanitary Measures Agreement, EPA notified the WTO of the
request to revise these tolerances on September 14, 2015 as WTO
notification G/SPS/N/USA/2778. In this action, EPA is allowing the
existing higher tolerances to remain in effect for 6 months following
the publication of this rule in order to allow a reasonable interval
for producers in the exporting countries to adapt to the requirements
of these modified tolerances. On December 14, 2016, those existing
higher tolerances will expire, and the new reduced tolerances for
artichoke, globe; fruit, stone, group 12-12; hop, dried cones; and nut,
tree, group 14-12 will remain to cover residues of chlorantraniliprole
on those commodities. Before that date, residues of chlorantraniliprole
on those commodities would be permitted up to the higher tolerance
levels; after that date, residues of chlorantraniliprole on artichoke,
globe; the commodities contained in stone fruit group 12-12 and tree
nut group 14-12; and hop, dried cones will need to comply with the new
lower tolerance levels. This reduction in tolerance is not
discriminatory; the same food safety standard contained in the FFDCA
applies equally to domestically produced and imported foods.

V. Conclusion

    Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of
chlorantraniliprole, 3-bromo-N-[4-chloro-2-methyl-6-[(methylamino)-
carbonyl]phenyl]-1-(3-chloro-2-pyridinyl)-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxamide, in
or on in or on artichoke, globe at 2.0 ppm; fruit, stone, group 12-12
at 2.5 ppm; hop, dried cones at 40 ppm; and nut, tree, group 14-12 at
0.02 ppm. Upon establishment of the aforementioned tolerances, the
Agency is removing the tolerances for cherry, sweet at 2.0 ppm; cherry,
tart at 2.0 ppm; plum, chickasaw at 2.0 ppm; and plum, damson at 2.0
ppm as they are subsumed within the newly established group 12-12
tolerances. The Agency is adding an expiration date of December 14,
2016 to the existing tolerances for artichoke, globe at 4.0 ppm; nut,
tree, group 14 at 0.04 ppm; pistachio at 0.04 ppm; fruit, stone, group
12-12, except cherry, chickasaw plum, and damson plum at 4.0 ppm; and
hop, dried cones at 90 ppm. Residues of chlorantraniliprole will be
covered by these higher tolerances until the expiration date, after
which time, they will need to comply with the lower tolerances being
established today. Finally, the Agency is amending the existing
tolerance for egg (increasing the tolerance level from 0.2 ppm to 1.0
ppm) to finalize its efforts to establish that tolerance in the Federal
Register of September 18, 2013.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action establishes tolerances under FFDCA section 408(d) in
response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and
Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this action has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this action is not
subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled
``Protection of

Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not contain any information
collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require any special
considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal Actions
to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerances in
this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
    This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this action. In addition, this
action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded
mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
    This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).

VII. Congressional Review Act

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

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

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

    Dated: May 31, 2016.
Susan Lewis,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

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

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

0
2. In Sec.  180.628, in the table in paragraph (a):
0
a. Remove the entries for ``Cherry, sweet,'' ``Cherry, tart,'' ``Plum,
chickasaw,'' and ``Plum, damson;''
0
b. Revise the entry for ``Egg;''
0
c. Amend the existing entries by adding a footnote for ``Artichoke,
globe,'' ``Fruit, stone, group 12-12, except cherry, chickasaw plum,
and damson plum,'' ``Hop, dried cones,'' ``Nut, tree, group 14,'' and
``Pistachio;'' and
0
d. Add alphabetically the entries for ``Artichoke, globe,'' ``Fruit,
stone, group 12-12,'' ``Hop, dried cones,'' and ``Nut, tree, group 14-
12.''
    The additions and revisions read as follows:

Sec.  180.628  Chlorantraniliprole; tolerances for residues.

    (a) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Parts per
                        Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Artichoke, globe \1\....................................             4.0
Artichoke, globe........................................             2.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Egg.....................................................             1.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fruit, stone, group 12-12...............................             2.5
Fruit, stone, group 12-12, except cherry, chickasaw                  4.0
 plum, and damson plum \1\..............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hop, dried cones \1\....................................              90
Hop, dried cones........................................              40
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nut, tree, group 14 \1\.................................            0.04
Nut, tree, group 14-12..................................            0.02
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pistachio \1\...........................................            0.04
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This tolerance expires on December 14, 2016.

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016-13910 Filed 6-13-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 130 (Monday, July 12, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 36516-36519]
[FR Doc No: 2021-14692]

========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 130 / Monday, July 12, 2021 /
Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0559; Project Identifier MCAI-2021-00079-R]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede airworthiness directive (AD)
2020-24-03 which applies to certain Airbus Helicopters Model AS350B,
AS350BA, AS350B1, AS350B2, AS350D, AS355E, AS355F, AS355F1, and AS355F2
helicopters. AD 2020-24-03 requires testing the UP/DOWN switches of a
certain part-numbered DUNLOP cyclic stick grip, installing a placard,
and revising the existing Rotorcraft Flight Manual (RFM) for your
helicopter, or removing the DUNLOP cyclic stick grip. Since the FAA
issued AD 2020-24-03, Airbus Helicopters developed a modification
procedure for the electrical wiring of the hoist control of the DUNLOP
cyclic stick grip. This proposed AD would retain some requirements of
AD 2020-24-03 and would also require incorporating the new
modification, and removing the placard and the RFM amendment installed
previously as required by AD 2020-24-03. The proposed additional
actions would be required as specified in a European Union Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA) AD, which is proposed for incorporation by
reference (IBR). The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by August 26,
2021.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For material that is proposed for IBR in this AD, contact the EASA,
Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999
000; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet www.easa.europa.eu. You may
find this IBR material on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view this material at the FAA, Office of the
Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321,
Fort Worth, TX 76177. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available in the
AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0559.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-
0559; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this NPRM, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for Docket Operations is listed above. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daniel Poblete, Aerospace Engineer,
Systems & Equipment Section, Los Angeles ACO Branch, Compliance &
Airworthiness Division, 3960 Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, CA 90712;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2021-0559; Project Identifier
MCAI-2021-00079-R'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposal because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact received about this proposal.

Confidential Business Information

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

Background

    The FAA issued AD 2020-24-03, Amendment 39-21333 (85 FR 76955,
December 1, 2020), (AD 2020-24-03), which applies to Airbus Helicopters
Model AS350B, AS350BA, AS350B1, AS350B2, AS350D, AS355E, AS355F,
AS355F1, and AS355F2 helicopters with DUNLOP cyclic stick grip
manufacturer part number (MP/N) AC66444 with UP/DOWN switches for
rescue hoist control installed. AD 2020-24-03 requires accomplishing a
ground test of the UP/DOWN switches of DUNLOP cyclic stick grip for
proper function before each hoist operation. If there is any
uncommanded hoist action, AD 2020-24-03 requires removing the DUNLOP
cyclic stick grip from service. If DUNLOP cyclic stick grip MP/N
AC66444 is installed, before the next operation, AD 2020-24-03 also
requires installing a placard and revising the existing RFM for your
helicopter to prohibit the use of the UP/DOWN switches of the DUNLOP
cyclic stick grip. Alternatively, AD 2020-24-03 allows removing DUNLOP
cyclic stick grip MP/N AC66444, however before the DUNLOP cyclic stick
grip is re-installed, AD 2020-24-03 requires accomplishing a ground
test of the UP/DOWN switches and installing the placard and revising
the existing RFM for your helicopter. AD 2020-24-03 also prohibits
installing an affected DUNLOP cyclic stick grip unless the ground
testing of the UP/DOWN switches has been accomplished, the placard has
been installed, and the existing RFM for your helicopter has been
revised. The FAA issued AD 2020-24-03 to prevent an inadvertent
activation of the rescue hoist cable cutter and consequent detachment
of an external load or person from the helicopter hoist. This unsafe
condition could result in personal injury or injury to persons on the
ground.

Actions Since AD 2020-24-03 Was Issued

    Since the FAA issued AD 2020-24-03, Airbus Helicopters developed a
modification (MOD) MC20096 and issued service information that provides
instructions for modifying the electrical wiring of the hoist control
on DUNLOP cyclic stick grips.
    EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2021-0023, dated January 19, 2021
(EASA AD 2021-0023) to correct an unsafe condition for Airbus
Helicopters Model AS 350 and AS 355 helicopters.
    This proposed AD was prompted by Airbus Helicopters developing MOD
MC20096 and Airbus Helicopters issuing service information for
performing this modification on the DUNLOP cyclic stick. The FAA is
proposing this AD to address inadvertent activation of the rescue hoist
cable cutter function and consequent detachment of an external load or
person from the helicopter hoist, possibly resulting in personal
injury, or injury to persons on the ground. See EASA AD 2021-0023 for
additional background information.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2021-0023 specifies procedures for installing the placard
and revising the Flight Manual to prohibit the use of the UP/DOWN
switches of the DUNLOP cyclic stick MP/N AC66444. EASA AD 2021-0023
also specifies procedures for modifying the electrical wiring of the
DUNLOP cyclic stick and removing both the placard and RFM amendment
previously installed.
    This material is reasonably available because the interested
parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by
the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    These helicopters have been approved by the aviation authority of
another country, and are approved for operation in the United States.
Pursuant to the bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority,
the FAA has been notified of the unsafe condition described in the EASA
AD referenced above. The FAA is proposing this AD after evaluating all
the relevant information and determining the unsafe condition described
previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of these
same type designs.

Explanation of Retained Requirements

    Although this proposed AD does not explicitly restate the
requirements of AD 2020-24-03, this proposed AD would retain certain
requirements of AD 2020-24-03. Those requirements are referenced in
EASA AD 2021-0023, which, in turn, is referenced in paragraph (g) of
this proposed AD.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in EASA AD 2021-0023 described previously, as incorporated by
reference, except for any differences identified as exceptions in the
regulatory text of this proposed AD and except as discussed under
``Differences Between this Proposed AD and EASA AD 2021-0023.''

Explanation of Required Compliance Information

    In the FAA's ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the AD
process, the FAA developed a process to use certain civil aviation
authority (CAA) ADs as the primary source of information for compliance
with requirements for corresponding FAA ADs. The FAA has been
coordinating this process with manufacturers and CAAs. As a result,
EASA AD 2021-0023 will be incorporated by reference in the FAA final
rule. This proposed AD would, therefore, require compliance with EASA
AD 2021-0023 in its entirety, through that incorporation, except for
any differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this
proposed AD. Using common terms that are the same as the heading of a
particular section in EASA AD 2021-0023 does not mean that operators
need comply only with that section. For example, where the AD
requirement refers to ``all required actions and compliance times,''
compliance with this AD requirement is not limited to the section
titled ``Required Action(s) and Compliance Time(s)'' in EASA AD 2021-
0023. Service information specified in EASA AD 2021-0023 that is
required for compliance with it will be available at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-
0559 after the FAA final rule is published.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and EASA AD 2021-0023

    For helicopters with DUNLOP cyclic stick grip MP/N AC66444 with UP/
DOWN switches for rescue hoist control installed, this proposed AD
would require accomplishing a ground test of the UP/DOWN switches for
proper function before each hoist operation, whereas the EASA AD does
not. Where EASA AD 2021-0023 refers to its effective date or the
effective date of EASA Emergency AD 2020-0217-E, dated October 8, 2020,
this proposed AD would require using the effective date of this AD.
Where the service information referenced in EASA AD 2021-0023 specifies
``work must be performed on the helicopter by the operator,'' this
proposed AD would require that the work be accomplished by a mechanic
that meets the requirements of 14 CFR part 65 subpart D. Where the
service information referenced in EASA AD 2021-0023 specifies to
discard certain placards and Flight Manual pages (that were required by
EASA AD 2020-0217-E), this proposed AD would require

removing them instead. EASA AD 2021-0023 requires operators to ``inform
all flight crews'' and thereafter to ``operate the helicopter
accordingly.'' However, this proposed AD would not require those
actions. Where paragraph (4) of EASA AD 2020-0023 allows modifying a
Group 2 helicopter into a Group 1 helicopter, this proposed AD would
also require accomplishing the requirements of paragraph (g)(1) of this
AD. Finally, the service information referenced in EASA AD 2021-0023
requires reporting certain information, whereas this proposed AD would
not.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this proposed AD would affect 390
helicopters of U.S. Registry. The FAA estimates that operators may
incur the following costs in order to comply with this proposed AD.
Labor costs are estimated at $85 per work-hour.
    Accomplishing a ground test of the UP/DOWN switches for proper
function takes a minimal amount of time for a nominal cost. Replacing a
DUNLOP cyclic stick grip, if required, takes about 2.5 work-hours and
parts cost about $2,500 for an estimated cost of $2,713. Installing the
placard and revising the existing RFM for your helicopter would take
about 0.5 work-hour for an estimated cost of $43 per helicopter and
$16,770 for the U.S. fleet.
    Modifying the electrical wiring of the DUNLOP cyclic stick would
take up to 4 work-hours and parts would cost $2,147 for an estimated
cost of up to $2,487 per helicopter and $969,930 for the U.S. fleet.
Removing the placard and revising the existing RFM for your helicopter
would take about 0.5 work-hour for an estimated cost of $43 per
helicopter and $16,770 for the U.S. fleet.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13   [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by:
0
a. Removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2020-24-03, Amendment 39-21333
(85 FR 76955, December 1, 2020); and
0
b. Adding the following new AD:

Airbus Helicopters: Docket No. FAA-2021-0559; Project Identifier
MCAI-2021-00079-R.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) by August 26, 2021.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2020-24-03, Amendment 39-21333 (85 FR 76955,
December 1, 2020) (AD 2020-24-03).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus Helicopters Model AS350B, AS350BA,
AS350B1, AS350B2, AS350D, AS355E, AS355F, AS355F1, and AS355F2
helicopters, certificated in any category, as identified in European
Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2021-0023, dated January 19,
2021 (EASA AD 2021-0023).

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 2500, Cabin
Equipment/Furnishings.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by the development of a modification of the
electrical wiring of the hoist control on the DUNLOP cyclic stick
grip. The FAA is issuing this AD to prevent inadvertent activation
of the rescue hoist cable cutter and consequent detachment of an
external load or person from the helicopter hoist. This condition
could result in personal injury or injury to persons on the ground.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Requirements

    (1) For helicopters with DUNLOP cyclic stick grip manufacturer
part number AC66444 with UP/DOWN switches for rescue hoist control
installed, before each hoist operation after December 16, 2020 (the
effective date of AD 2020-24-03), accomplish a ground test of the
UP/DOWN switches for proper function. If there is any uncommanded
hoist action, before further flight, remove the DUNLOP cyclic stick
grip from service. Accomplishing the modification in paragraph (2)
of EASA AD 2021-0023 constitutes terminating action for the
requirements of this paragraph.
    (2) Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with
all required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, EASA AD 2021-0023.

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2021-0023

    (1) Where EASA AD 2021-0023 refers to October 8, 2020 (the
effective date of EASA Emergency AD 2020-0217-E, dated October 6,
2020 (EASA AD 2020-0217-E)), this AD requires using the effective
date of this AD.
    (2) Where the service information referenced in paragraph (1) of
EASA AD 2020-0023 specifies that the ``work must be performed on the
helicopter by the operator,'' this AD requires that the work be
accomplished by a mechanic that meets the requirements of 14 CFR
part 65 subpart D.
    (3) Where EASA AD 2021-0023 refers to its effective date, this
AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (4) Where EASA AD 2021-0023 refers to flight hours (FH), this AD
requires using hours time-in-service.
    (5) Where the service information referenced in EASA AD 2021-
0023 specifies to discard certain placards and Flight Manual pages
(that were required by EASA AD 2020-0217-E), this AD requires
removing them.
    (6) Where paragraph (3) of EASA AD 2021-0023 specifies to
``inform all flight crews and, thereafter, operate the helicopter
accordingly,'' this AD does not require those actions.
    (7) Where paragraph (4) of EASA AD 2020-0023 allows modifying a
Group 2 helicopter into a Group 1 helicopter, this AD also

requires accomplishing the requirements of paragraph (g)(1) of this
AD.
    (8) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2021-0023 does not apply
to this AD.

(i) No Reporting Requirement

    Where the service information referenced in EASA AD 2021-0023
specifies to submit certain information to the manufacturer, this AD
does not include that requirement.

(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, International Validation Branch, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the manager of the International Validation Branch, send
it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (k)(2) of
this AD. Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) 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.

(k) Related Information

    (1) For EASA AD 2021-0023, contact the EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-
Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this
EASA AD on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. For Airbus
Helicopter service information identified in this AD, Airbus
Helicopters, 2701 N. Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX 75052; telephone
(972) 641-0000 or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; or at https://www.airbus.com/helicopters/services/technical-support.html. You may
view this material at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel,
Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX
76177. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. The EASA material may be found in the AD
docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0559.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Daniel Poblete,
Aerospace Engineer, Systems & Equipment Section, Los Angeles ACO
Branch, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, 3960 Paramount Blvd.,
Lakewood, CA 90712; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Issued on July 2, 2021.
Gaetano A. Sciortino,
Deputy Director for Strategic Initiatives, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-14692 Filed 7-9-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 199 (Monday, October 15, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62505-62506]
[FR Doc No: 2012-25264]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC13-3-000.
    Applicants: LDH Rensselaer LLC, Louis Dreyfus Energy Services L.P.
    Description: Joint Application for Disposition of Jurisdictional
Facilities and Related Requests of LDH Rensselaer LLC and Louis Dreyfus
Energy Services, L.P.
    Filed Date: 10/3/12.
    Accession Number: 20121003-5151.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/24/12.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG13-1-000.
    Applicants: Big Blue Wind Farm, LLC.
    Description: Self-Certification of EWG Status of Big Blue Wind
Farm, LLC.
    Filed Date: 10/3/12.
    Accession Number: 20121003-5164.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/24/12.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER11-4318-002.
    Applicants: San Diego Gas & Electric Company.
    Description: San Diego Gas & Electric Company submits Compliance
Filing pertaining to their Formula 3 Cycle 5 Informational Filing.

    Filed Date: 10/2/12.
    Accession Number: 20121003-0203.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/23/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-2448-001.
    Applicants: Chisholm View Wind Project, LLC.
    Description: Chisholm View Wind Project, LLC submits tariff filing
per 35.17(b): Chisholm View Amended MBR to be effective 9/15/2012.
    Filed Date: 10/3/12.
    Accession Number: 20121003-5118.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/24/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-2454-001.
    Applicants: San Diego Gas & Electric Company.
    Description: San Diego Gas & Electric Company submits Cycle 6
Supplemental Filing.
    Filed Date: 10/2/12.
    Accession Number: 20121003-0200.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/23/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-11-000.
    Applicants: Sierra Pacific Power Company.
    Description: Rate Schedule No. 55--Amended and Restated PPA--
CalPeco to be effective 12/1/2012.
    Filed Date: 10/2/12.
    Accession Number: 20121002-5145.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/23/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-12-000.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
    Description: 10-2-12 ATCLLC Attachment MM to be effective 12/1/
2012.
    Filed Date: 10/2/12.
    Accession Number: 20121002-5165.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/23/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-13-000.
    Applicants: NV Energy, Inc.
    Description: Service Agreement No. 11-00052 Amended and Restated
LGIA--Patua Project LLC to be effective 9/11/2012.
    Filed Date: 10/2/12.
    Accession Number: 20121002-5170.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/23/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-14-000.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
    Description: SA 2254 H075 Cancellation to be effective 8/29/2012.
    Filed Date: 10/3/12.
    Accession Number: 20121003-5030.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/24/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-15-000.
    Applicants: West Oaks Energy, LLC.
    Description: West Oaks Energy, LLC submits tariff filing per 35.15:
Notice of Cancellation to be effective 10/4/2012.
    Filed Date: 10/3/12.
    Accession Number: 20121003-5071.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/24/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-16-000.
    Applicants: Arizona Public Service Company.
    Description: Arizona Public Service Company submits tariff filing
per 35.15: Cancellation of APS Rate Schedule No. 255 to be effective
12/3/2012.
    Filed Date: 10/3/12.
    Accession Number: 20121003-5120.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/24/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-17-000.
    Applicants: Niagara Wind Power, LLC.
    Description: Niagara Wind Power, LLC submits tariff filing per
35.12: Application for Market-Based Rate Authorization and Related
Waivers and Approval to be effective 10/3/2012.
    Filed Date: 10/3/12.
    Accession Number: 20121003-5124.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/24/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-18-000.
    Applicants: Big Blue Wind Farm, LLC.
    Description: Big Blue Wind Farm, LLC submits tariff filing per
35.12: Application for Market-Based Rate Authority and Baseline Tariff
to be effective 10/4/2012.
    Filed Date: 10/3/12.
    Accession Number: 20121003-5127.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/24/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-19-000.
    Applicants: Tampa Electric Company.
    Description: Tampa Electric Company submits tariff filing per
35.15: Cancellation of First Revised Service Agreement No. 6--St. Cloud
to be effective 12/31/2012.
    Filed Date: 10/3/12.
    Accession Number: 20121003-5129.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/24/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-21-000.
    Applicants: National Grid Generation LLC.
    Description: National Grid Generation LLC submits Pension and Other
Post Employment Benefits Costs for the year ending December 31, 2012.
    Filed Date: 10/3/12.
    Accession Number: 20121003-5153.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/24/12.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: October 4, 2012.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-25264 Filed 10-12-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 206 (Friday, October 24, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 63536-63539]
[FR Doc No: 2014-25279]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2014-0646; FRL-9918-38-Region 9]

Findings of Failure To Submit State Implementation Plan;
California; Interstate Transport Requirements for 2006 24-Hour Fine
Particulate Matter (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality
Standards

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is making a
finding that California has not submitted a State Implementation Plan
(SIP) revision for the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) provisions that
require the SIP to contain adequate provisions to address the transport
of air pollution to other states. Specifically, these requirements
pertain to significant contribution to nonattainment, or interference
with maintenance, of the 2006 24-hour fine particulate matter
(PM2.5) national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) in
any other state. EPA refers to such submittals as ``interstate
transport'' SIPs and often refers to the specific requirements
addressed in this final rule as ``prongs 1 and 2'' since they address
the first two of several interstate transport requirements. This
finding of failure to submit establishes a deadline of 24 months after
the effective date of this final rule for EPA to promulgate a Federal
Implementation Plan (FIP) to address these two interstate transport
requirements for California for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS
unless, prior to that time, the state submits, and EPA approves, a
submittal that meets these requirements.

DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is effective on November 24,
2014.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action, identified by
Docket ID Number EPA-R09-OAR-2014-0646. The index to the docket for
this action 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., confidential business information
(CBI)). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an
appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed
directly below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rory Mays, Air Planning Office (AIR-
2), EPA Region IX,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, the terms ``we,''
``us,'' and ``our'' refer to EPA.
    Section 553 of the Administrative Procedures Act, 5 United States
Code (U.S.C.) 553(b)(B), provides that, when an agency for good cause
finds that notice and public procedure are impracticable, unnecessary
or contrary to the public interest, the agency may issue a rule without
providing notice and an opportunity for public comment. EPA has
determined that there is good cause for making this rule final without
prior proposal and opportunity for

comment because no significant EPA judgment is involved in making a
finding of failure to submit SIPs, or elements of SIPs, required by the
CAA, where states have made no submittals, or incomplete submittals, to
meet the requirement by the statutory date. Thus, notice and public
procedure are unnecessary. EPA finds that this constitutes good cause
under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B).

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. Final Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    CAA section 110(a)(1) requires states to submit SIP revisions that
provide for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of a new
or revised NAAQS within three years following the promulgation of such
NAAQS, or within such shorter period as EPA may prescribe. Section
110(a)(2) sets the content requirements of such a plan, which generally
relate to the information and authorities, compliance assurances,
procedural requirements, and control measures that constitute the
``infrastructure'' of a state's air quality management program. A SIP
revision addressing these requirements is referred to as an
``infrastructure SIP.'' Within these requirements, section
110(a)(2)(D)(i) contains requirements to address interstate transport
of NAAQS pollutants. A SIP revision submitted for this sub-section is
referred to as an ``interstate transport SIP.'' In turn, section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requires that such a plan contain adequate
provisions to prohibit emissions from the state that will contribute
significantly to nonattainment of the NAAQS in any other state (``prong
1'') or interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS in any other state
(``prong 2''). Interstate transport prongs 1 and 2 are the SIP content
requirements relevant to this findings notice.
    On September 21, 2006, EPA promulgated a final rule revising the
existing 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS from 65 micrograms per
cubic meter ([micro]g/m\3\) to 35 [micro]g/m\3\ and retained the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS of 15 [micro]g/m\3\.\1\ This set an
infrastructure SIP submittal deadline of September 21, 2009 for the
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, including the interstate transport
requirements. EPA issued guidance for satisfying the interstate
transport requirements for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS on
September 25, 2009 (``EPA's 2009 Guidance''), including guidance on
interstate transport prongs 1 and 2.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 71 FR 61144, October 17, 2006. Note that only new or revised
standards trigger the requirement for states to submit
infrastructure SIPs and interstate transport SIPs, pursuant to CAA
section 110(a)(1), while retained standards, such as the 2006 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS, do not trigger that requirement.
    \2\ Memorandum from William T. Harnett, Director, Air Quality
Policy Division, OAQPS, ``Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under
Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particulate
Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards,'' September 25, 2009,
pp. 3-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Prior to issuance of this guidance, California Air Resources Board
(ARB) submitted an infrastructure SIP certification letter for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS on July 7, 2009 (``2009 Submittal'').\3\ This
submittal referred to an interim draft of EPA's 2009 Guidance and
largely relied on California's earlier infrastructure SIP submittal of
November 16, 2007 for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, including
reliance on that earlier submittal's response to the requirements for
interstate transport prongs 1 and 2. On the basis of California's 2009
Submittal, California was not included in EPA's 2010 notice that made
findings of failure to submit SIP revisions for such requirements for
the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS for 29 states and
territories.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Letter from Lynn Terry, Deputy Executive Officer, California
Air Resources Board to Laura Yoshii, Acting Regional Administrator,
U.S. EPA Region IX, July 7, 2009.
    \4\ 75 FR 32673, June 9, 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Sierra Club sued EPA on December 21, 2012, alleging that EPA had
failed to take action on infrastructure SIP submittals for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS from several states, including California.\5\ In
the same filing, Sierra Club also alleged that EPA had failed to
promulgate FIPs for several other states addressing CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) (i.e., interstate transport prongs 1 and 2) for the
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. That lawsuit was stayed by the U.S.
District Court for the Northern District of California on March 29,
2013 as it related to on-going litigation in EME Homer City v. EPA
(pertaining to EPA's Cross State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR), which EPA
promulgated to address interstate transport prongs 1 and 2 in the
eastern portion of the U.S.).\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Sierra Club v. EPA, No. 12-6472, U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of California, December 21, 2012.
    \6\ EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, No. 11-1302, U.S.
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit Court, August 21, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 6, 2014, California submitted a multi-pollutant
infrastructure SIP revision for several NAAQS (``2014 Submittal'') that
includes a SIP revision for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, except for
the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I).\7\ With respect to
interstate transport prongs 1 and 2, the submittal stated that
California was not addressing these requirements pursuant to the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit Court ruling in EME Homer City v.
EPA, which ARB read as concluding that ``states do not need to address
Prong 1 and Prong 2 until U.S. EPA quantifies each state's transport
obligation.'' \8\ Shortly thereafter, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed
this part of the judgment of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C.
Circuit Court.\9\ Thus, California's submittal of an interstate
transport SIP for prongs 1 and 2 for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS, or any other NAAQS, is not contingent on EPA first defining
California's CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) obligations for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ ``California Infrastructure SIP,'' March 6, 2014, p. 1.
    \8\ 2014 Submittal, p. 18.
    \9\ EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, No. 12-1182, U.S.
Supreme Court, certiorari to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C.
Circuit, April 29, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On July 18, 2014, California withdrew its 2009 Submittal, stating
that ARB would submit a SIP revision to address the outstanding
requirements.\10\ The effect of this withdrawal letter is that
California does not have an approved or pending submittal addressing
the interstate transport prongs for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. We
must therefore make a finding that California has failed to submit a
SIP revision to address the requirements of interstate transport prongs
1 and 2 by the applicable deadline of September 21, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Letter from Lynn Terry, Deputy Executive Officer,
California Air Resources Board to Jared Blumenfeld, Regional
Administrator, U.S. EPA Region IX, July 18, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Final Action

    This action reflects EPA's determination with respect to the
requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS for California only, as discussed in section I
of this findings notice. EPA is making a finding of failure to submit
for California for the interstate transport requirements of CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. This
finding establishes a deadline of 24 months after the effective date of
this final rule for EPA to promulgate a FIP, in accordance with section
110(c)(1), unless prior to that time California submits, and EPA
approves, a submittal that addresses these interstate transport
requirements. This finding of failure to submit does not impose
sanctions, and does not set deadlines for imposing sanctions as
described in section 179,

because it does not pertain to the elements of a CAA title I, part D
plan for nonattainment areas as required under section 110(a)(2)(I),
and because this action is not a SIP call pursuant to section
110(k)(5).

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and is
therefore not subject to review under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
(76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011).

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose an information collection burden. This
rule relates to the requirement in the CAA for states to submit SIPs
under section 110(a) to satisfy certain requirements pertaining to
interstate transport of air pollution under section 110(a)(2) of the
CAA for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA
requires that states submit SIPs that implement, maintain, and enforce
a new or revised NAAQS which satisfy the requirements of section
110(a)(2), including the interstate transport requirements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), within 3 years of promulgation of such standard, or
shorter period as EPA may provide. This final rule does not establish
any new information collection requirement apart from that already
required by law. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in the
CFR are listed in 40 CFR Part 9.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any action subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative
Procedures Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that
the action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
    For the purpose of assessing the impacts of this final action on
small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business that
is a small industry entity as defined in the U.S. Small Business
Administration size standards (See 13 CFR 121); (2) a small
governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a city, county, town,
school district or special district with a population of less than
50,000; and (3) a small organization that is any not-for-profit
enterprise which independently owned and operated is not dominate in
its field.
    After considering the economic impacts of this final action on
small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This action
relates to the requirement in the CAA for states to submit SIPs under
section 110(a) to satisfy certain requirements pertaining to interstate
transport of air pollution under section 110(a)(2) of the CAA for the
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA requires that
states submit SIPs that implement, maintain, and enforce a new or
revised NAAQS which satisfy the requirements of section 110(a)(2),
including the interstate transport requirements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), within 3 years of promulgation of such standard, or
shorter period as EPA may provide.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)

    This action contains no federal mandate under the provisions of
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. 1531-
1538 for state, local, and tribal governments and the private sector.
The action does not impose any new enforceable duty on any state, local
or private sector. Therefore, this action is not subject to the
requirements of section 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
    This action is also not subject to the requirements of section 203
of UMRA because it contains no regulatory requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. This action relates
to the requirement in the CAA for states to submit SIPs under section
110(a) to satisfy certain requirements pertaining to interstate
transport of air pollution under section 110(a)(2) of the CAA for the
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA requires that
states submit SIPs that implement, maintain, and enforce a new or
revised NAAQS which satisfy the requirements of section 110(a)(2),
including the interstate transport requirements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), within 3 years of promulgation of such standard, or
shorter period as EPA may provide.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as
specified in Executive Order 13132. The CAA establishes the scheme
whereby states take the lead in developing plans to meet the NAAQS.
This action will not modify the relationship of the states and EPA for
purposes of developing programs to implement the NAAQS. Thus, Executive
Order 13132 does not apply to this action.

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

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249). It does not have a substantial
direct effect on one or more Indian Tribes, because no Tribe has
implemented an air quality management program related to the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS. Furthermore, this action does not affect the
relationship or distribution of power and responsibilities between the
Federal government and Indian Tribes. The CAA and the Tribal Air Rule
establish the relationship of the Federal government and Tribes in
developing plans to attain the NAAQS, and this rule does nothing to
modify that relationship. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to
this action.

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

    EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997)
as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern health or
safety risks, such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of
the Executive Order has the potential to influence the regulation. This
action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is making a
finding as to whether or not California has submitted a complete SIP
for the interstate transport requirements specified in CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) necessary to implement the 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS. This finding of failure to submit for these interstate transport
requirements establishes a deadline of 24 months after the effective
date of this final rule for EPA to a promulgate FIP to address the
outstanding SIP elements unless, prior to that time, California
submits, and EPA approves, the required SIP.

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

    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' as defined in
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), because it is not
likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,

distribution, or use of energy. At the time of proposal of the
implementation rule for the prior 1997 PM2.5 standard,
information on the methodology and data regarding the assessment of
potential energy impacts regarding implementation of the 2006
PM2.5 standard was not addressed because the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS is not a significant energy action. This is
based on the fact that no impacts are specifically ascribed to the
standard only. Potential energy impacts are ascribed during the
implementation phase by the states. An energy impact analysis, as part
of a regulatory impact analysis or other assessment for the
PM2.5 NAAQS rule, was prepared by the Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC, April 24, 2003. (71
FR 60853, October 17, 2006)

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

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

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes
federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
    EPA has determined that this final action will not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not
directly affect the level of protection provided to human health or the
environment. This notice is making a finding concerning whether
California has submitted or failed to submit a complete SIP for the
interstate transport requirements specified in CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) necessary to implement the 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS.

K. Congressional Review Act

    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 action 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). This action will be effective November 24, 2014.

L. Judicial Review

    Section 307(b)(1) of the CAA indicates which Federal Courts of
Appeal have venue for petitions of review of final actions by EPA. This
section provides, in part, that petitions for review must be filed in
the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit: (i) When the
EPA action consists of ``nationally applicable regulations promulgated,
or final actions taken, by the Administrator,'' or (ii) when such
action is locally or regionally applicable, if ``such action is based
on a determination of nationwide scope or effect and if in taking such
action the Administrator finds and publishes that such action is based
on such a determination.''
    The Administrator is determining that this action making a finding
of failure to submit SIPs related to the section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)
requirements for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS is of
nationwide scope and effect for the purposes of section 307(b)(1). This
is particularly appropriate because in the report on the 1977
Amendments that revised section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, Congress noted
that the Administrator's determination that an action is of
``nationwide scope or effect'' would be appropriate for any action that
has ``scope or effect beyond a single judicial circuit.'' H.R. Rep. No.
95-294 at 323, 324, reprinted in 1977 U.S.C.C.A.N.1402-03. Here, the
scope and effect of this rulemaking extends to numerous judicial
circuits since the finding of failure to submit a SIP applies to a
rulemaking of national scope and effect. In these circumstances,
section 307(b)(1) and its legislative history call for the
Administrator to find the rule to be of ``nationwide scope or effect''
and for venue to be in the District of Columbia Circuit.
    Thus, any petitions for review of this action related to a finding
of failure to submit SIPs related to the requirements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA must be filed in the Court of Appeals for
the District of Columbia Circuit within 60 days from the date final
action is published in the Federal Register.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Approval and promulgation of implementation plans, Environmental
protection, Administrative practice and procedures, Air pollution
control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Particulate matter, and Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: September 29, 2014.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, U.S. EPA, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2014-25279 Filed 10-23-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 175 (Tuesday, September 14, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51203-51204]
[FR Doc No: 2021-19726]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-92894; File No. SR-CboeBZX-2021-019]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Designation of a Longer Period for Commission Action on Proceedings To
Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove a Proposed Rule Change To
List and Trade Shares of the VanEck Bitcoin Trust Under BZX Rule
14.11(e)(4), Commodity-Based Trust Shares

September 8, 2021.
    On March 1, 2021, Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (``BZX'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''),
pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to
list and trade shares of the VanEck Bitcoin Trust under BZX Rule
14.11(e)(4), Commodity-Based Trust Shares. The proposed rule change was
published for comment in the Federal Register on March 19, 2021.\3\ On
April 28, 2021, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\4\ the
Commission designated a longer period within which to approve the
proposed rule change, disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute
proceedings to determine whether to disapprove the proposed rule
change.\5\ On June 16, 2021, the Commission instituted proceedings
under Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act \6\ to determine whether to
approve or disapprove the proposed rule change.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 91326 (March 15,
2021), 86 FR 14987 (March 19, 2021). Comments on the proposed rule
change can be found at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-cboebzx-2021-019/srcboebzx2021019.htm.
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 91695 (April 28,
2021), 86 FR 24066 (May 5, 2021). The Commission designated June 17,
2021, as the date by which it should approve, disapprove, or
institute proceedings to determine whether to disapprove the
proposed rule change.
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 92196 (June 16,
2021), 86 FR 32985 (June 23, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act \8\ provides that, after initiating
proceedings, the Commission shall issue an order approving or
disapproving the proposed rule change not later than 180 days after the
date of publication of notice of filing of the proposed rule change.
The Commission may extend the period for issuing an order approving or
disapproving the proposed rule change,

however, by not more than 60 days if the Commission determines that a
longer period is appropriate and publishes the reasons for such
determination. The proposed rule change was published for comment in
the Federal Register on March 19, 2021.\9\ The 180th day after
publication of the proposed rule change is September 15, 2021. The
Commission is extending the time period for approving or disapproving
the proposed rule change for an additional 60 days.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \9\ See supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds that it is appropriate to designate a longer
period within which to issue an order approving or disapproving the
proposed rule change so that it has sufficient time to consider the
proposed rule change and the issues raised in the comment letters that
have been submitted in connection therewith. Accordingly, the
Commission, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\10\ designates
November 14, 2021, as the date by which the Commission shall either
approve or disapprove the proposed rule change (File Number SR-CboeBZX-
2021-019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \11\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(57).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\11\
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-19726 Filed 9-13-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 215 (Monday, November 7, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 78138]
[FR Doc No: 2016-26839]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER17-239-000]

TPE Alta Luna, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based
Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding
TPE Alta Luna, LLC `s application for market-based rate authority, with
an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a
request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is November 21, 2016.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for electronic review in the
Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an
eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive
email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s).
For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: November 1, 2016.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-26839 Filed 11-4-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: August 28, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 166)]
[Notices]
[Page 49276]
[DOCID:fr28au07-89]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No.CP07-431-000]

Western Gas Resources, Inc., and Pioneer Natural Resources (USA),
Inc.; Notice of Application

August 21, 2007.
    Take notice that on August 7, 2007, as supplemented on August 20,
2007, Western Gas Resources, Inc. (WGR), 1099 18th Street, Suite 1200,
Denver, Colorado 80202 and Pioneer Natural Resources (USA), Inc.
(Pioneer), 1400 Williams Square West, 5205 North O'Connor Boulevard,
Irving, Texas, filed in Docket No. CP07-431-000, an application
pursuant to section 7(b) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and Part 157 of
the Commission's Regulations, for an order permitting and approving
WGR's abandonment by conveyance to Atlas Pipeline Mid-Continent
WestTex, LLC (WestTex) of WGR's interest in certain facilities referred
to as the Midkiff Line located in Regan and Upton Counties, Texas, all
as more fully set forth in the application which is on file with the
Commission and open to public inspection.
    This filing is accessible online at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    On June 22, 2007, the Commission issued a certificate to WGR and
Pioneer, jointly, in Docket Nos. CP06-385-000 and -001, to operate and
maintain the Midkiff Line. Pioneer is also a co-applicant with WestTex
in a related application filed in Docket No. CP07-432-000 requesting a
joint certificate to operate and maintain the Midkiff Line upon the
abandonment of WGR's interest in the line by conveyance to WestTex.
    Any questions regarding this application should be directed to
Sherri Manuel, Western Gas Resources, Inc., P.O. Box 1330, Houston,
Texas 77251-1330, or phone<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the comment date stated below, file with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a
motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or
385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person
obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by
the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all
documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must
submit 14 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a
copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only
parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders
in the proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project.
The Commission will consider these comments in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will
not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's
rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project
provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly
involved in the protest.
    Comments, protests and interventions may be filed electronically
via the Internet in lieu of paper. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a) (1) (iii) and
the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the ``e-Filing''
link at http://www.ferc.gov. The Commission strongly encourages

intervenors to file electronically. Persons unable to file
electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest
or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    Comment Date: September 12, 2007.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-16954 Filed 8-27-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 233 (Wednesday, December 6, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 57647]
[FR Doc No: 2017-26233]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Reports, Forms and Record Keeping Requirements; Agency
Information Collection Activity Under OMB Review

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), U.S.
Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this notice announces that the Information
Collection Request (ICR) abstracted below has been forwarded to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comment. The ICR
describes the nature of the information collections and their expected
burden. The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment period was
published on September 8, 2017 (82 FR 42571). The agency received no
comments.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before January 5, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Send comments, within 30 days, to the Office of Information
and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th
Street NW., Washington, DC 20503, Attention NHTSA Desk Officer.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Carlita Ballard at the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Office of International Policy,
Fuel Economy and Consumer Programs, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West
Building, Room W43-439, Washington, DC 20590. Ms. Ballard's telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

    Title: 49 CFR part 583--Automobile Parts Content Labeling.
    OMB Number: 2127-0573.
    Type of Request: Request for public comment on a previously
approved collection of information.
    Abstract: Part 583 establishes requirements for the disclosure of
information relating to the countries of origin of the equipment of new
passenger motor vehicles. This information will be used by NHTSA to
determine whether manufacturers are complying with the American
Automobile Labeling Act (49 U.S.C. 32304). The American Automobile
Labeling Act requires all new passenger motor vehicles (including
passenger cars, certain small buses, all light trucks and multipurpose
passenger vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating of 8,500 pounds
or less), to bear labels providing information about domestic and
foreign content of their equipment. With the affixed label on the new
passenger motor vehicles, it serves as an aid to potential purchasers
in the selection of new passenger motor vehicles by providing them with
information about the value of the U.S./Canadian and foreign parts of
each vehicle, the countries of origin of the engine and transmission,
and the site of the vehicle's final assembly.
    NHTSA anticipates approximately 20 vehicle manufacturers will be
affected by these reporting requirements. NHTSA does not believe that
any of these 20 manufacturers are a small business (i.e., one that
employs less than 500 persons) since each manufacturer employs more
than 500 persons. Manufacturers of new passenger motor vehicles,
including passenger cars, certain small buses, and light trucks with a
gross vehicle weight rating of 8,500 pounds or less, must file a report
annually.
    Affected Public: Vehicle manufacturers.
    Number of Respondents: 20.
    Total Annual Burden: 2,522 hours per respondent.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: NHTSA estimates that the vehicle
manufacturers will incur a total annual reporting hour and cost burden
of 50,440 hours and $3,716,740 respectively. The amount includes annual
burden hours incurred by multi-stage manufacturers and motor vehicle
equipment suppliers.
    Comments are invited on: Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Department, including whether the information will have practical
utility; the accuracy of the Department's estimate of the burden of the
proposed information collection; ways to enhance the quality, utility
and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to minimize
the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including
the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of
information technology. A comment to OMB is most effective if OMB
receives it within 30 days of publication.

    Authority:  Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. Chapter
35; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.95.

Raymond R. Posten,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2017-26233 Filed 12-5-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-59-P