[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 108 (Tuesday, June 6, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37110-37112]
[FR Doc No: 2023-11921]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-97626; File No. SR-ISE-2023-08]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq ISE, LLC; Notice Filing of
Amendment No. 1 and Order Instituting Proceedings To Determine Whether
To Approve or Disapprove a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by
Amendment No. 1, To Make Permanent Certain P.M.-Settled Pilots

May 31, 2023.

I. Introduction

    On February 23, 2023, Nasdaq ISE, LLC (``ISE'' 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
make permanent the pilot program to permit the listing and trading of
options based on \1/5\ the value of the Nasdaq-100 Index (``NQX'') and
the Exchange's nonstandard expirations pilot program (collectively, the
``Programs''). The proposed rule change was published for comment in
the Federal Register on March 2, 2023.\3\ On April 7, 2023, pursuant to
Section 19(b)(2) of the Exchange 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 May 11,
2023, the Exchange submitted Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule
change (``Amendment No. 1'').\6\ The Commission has received no comment
letters on the proposed rule change. The Commission is publishing this
notice to solicit comments on Amendment No. 1 from interested persons,
and is instituting proceedings pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the
Act \7\ to determine whether to approve or disapprove the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment No. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 96979 (February 24,
2023), 88 FR 13182 (``Notice'').
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 97261, 88 FR 22509
(April 13, 2023). The Commission designated May 31, 2023, as the
date by which the Commission shall approve or disapprove, or
institute proceedings to determine whether to approve or disapprove,
the proposed rule change.
    \6\ In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange inserts two footnotes and
amends a sentence in order to further clarify parts of the empirical
analysis performed by the Exchange. Amendment No. 1 is available at:
https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-ise-2023-08/srise202308.htm.
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment
No. 1

    The Exchange proposes to make permanent two pilot programs: (1) the
Exchange's nonstandard expirations pilot program (``Nonstandard
Pilot''), and (2) the Exchange's pilot to permit the listing and
trading of options based on \1/5\ the value of the Nasdaq-100 Index
(``NQX Pilot''). The Nonstandard Pilot permits the Exchange to open
P.M.-settled options on broad-based indexes that expire (1) on the last
day of the trading month (``EOM expirations'') and (2) on any Monday,
Wednesday, or Friday (other than the third Friday-of-the-month or days
that coincide with an end-of-month (``EOM'') expiration) and, with
respect to options on the Nasdaq-100 Index (``NDX'') and NQX options,
any Tuesday or Thursday (other than days that coincide with the third
Friday-of-the-month or an EOM expiration). The NQX Pilot permits the
listing of NQX options, which are European-style and cash-settled, and
have a contract multiplier of 100. The contract specifications for NQX
options mirror those of the NDX options contract listed on the
Exchange, except that NQX options are based on \1/5\ of the value of
the Nasdaq-100 Index, and are P.M.-settled pursuant to Options 4A,
Section 12(a)(6) of the ISE Rules.
    In February 2018, the Commission approved the Nonstandard Pilot on
a pilot basis.\8\ In March 2018, the Commission approved the NQX Pilot
on a pilot basis.\9\ In approving both Programs, the Commission noted
its concern about the potential impact on the market at expiration for
the underlying component stocks for a P.M.-settled, cash-settled index
options.\10\ However, the Commission also recognized the potential
impact was unclear.\11\ The Commission approved the Programs on a pilot
basis to allow the Exchange and the Commission to monitor for and
assess any potential for adverse market effects.\12\ The Nonstandard
Pilot was extended on multiple occasions and is set to expire on
November 6, 2023.\13\ Similarly, the NQX Pilot was extended on multiple
occasions, including recently, and is set to expire on November 6,
2023.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82612 (February 1,
2018), 83 FR 5470 (February 7, 2018) (SR-ISE-2017-111)
(``Nonstandard Approval Order'').
    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82911 (March 20,
2018), 83 FR 12966 (March 26, 2018) (SR-ISE-2017-106) (``NQX
Approval Order'').
    \10\ See Nonstandard Approval Order, supra note 8, at 5472 and
NQX Approval Order, supra note 9, at 12967. See also Securities
Exchange Act Release Nos. 64599 (June 3, 2011), 76 FR 33798, 33801-
02 (June 9, 2011) (order instituting proceedings to determine
whether to approve or disapprove a proposed rule change to allow the
listing and trading of SPXPM options); 65256 (September 2, 2011), 76
FR 55969, 55970-76 (September 9, 2011) (order approving proposed
rule change to establish a pilot program to list and trade SPXPM
options); and 68888 (February 8, 2013), 78 FR 10668, 10669 (February
14, 2013) (order approving the listing and trading of SPXPM on
CBOE).
    \11\ See NQX Approval Order, supra note 9, at 12967.
    \12\ See Nonstandard Approval Order, supra note 8, at 5472-73,
NQX Approval Order, supra note 9, at 12967.
    \13\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 97386 (April 26,
2023), 88 FR 27545 (May 2, 2023) (SR-ISE-2023-09) (``Programs
Extension'').
    \14\ See Programs Extension, supra note 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In order to facilitate assessment of the Programs, the Exchange
committed to provide the Commission with data and analysis for each
pilot.\15\ Among other things, the Exchange committed to provide an
annual report containing an analysis of volume, open interest and
trading patterns.\16\ In addition, for series that exceed certain
minimum open interest parameters, the annual report provides analysis
of index price volatility and, if needed, share trading activity.\17\
The Exchange also provides monthly data to the Commission and makes
public on its website the data and analysis previously submitted to the
Commission in connection with the Programs and will continue to make
public any data or analysis it submits under the Programs while the
Programs are still in effect.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See NQX Approval Order, supra note 9, at 12967 and
Nonstandard Approval Order, supra note 8, at 5472.
    \16\ See NQX Approval Order, supra note 9, at 12966-12967 and
Nonstandard Approval Order, supra note 8, at 5471-5472.
    \17\ See NQX Approval Order, supra note 9, at 12967 and
Nonstandard Approval Order, supra note 8, at 5472.
    \18\ See Programs Extension, supra note 13, at 27546-27547.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As set forth more fully in the Notice, the Exchange concludes that
P.M.-settled index option expirations are

unlikely to cause any disruptive effect on the market.\19\ The Exchange
further concludes there is no evidence that NQX options contract that
are P.M.-settled would result in reduced trading activity or
degradation in market quality of the A.M.-settled index options.\20\ In
order to support its overall assessment of the Program, the Exchange
provides an empirical assessment of the impact of P.M.-settled NDX
options on options market quality and examines market capacity around
the market close.\21\ The Exchange also includes an assessment of a
study conducted at the direction of the staff of the Commission's
Division of Economic and Risk Analysis.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 13184.
    \20\ See id.
    \21\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 13183.
    \22\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 13184-13190, 13194-13197.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's analysis presents data that the introduction of
P.M.-settlement corresponds to an increase in options trading tied to
the Nasdaq-100 Index. The Exchange notes within its analysis that it
seems unlikely that the introduction of NQX contracts had a significant
impact on the market quality of the full-sized Nasdaq-100 Index option
contracts.\23\ The Exchange observed a consistent decrease in relative
quoted spread from 2017 to 2022 for NDX options. When the Exchange
compared the spread trend of NDX monthly contracts to that of QQQ
monthly contracts, the Exchange states that the results suggest that
there is gradual decrease in both the NDX monthly contracts spread and
the QQQ contracts spread during the sample period.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ The Exchange notes that given that the size of the market
(measured in volume) for NQX options volume is small compared to
that of other P.M.-settled NDX options, the Exchange believes the
introduction of NQX option contracts is unlikely to adversely impact
the market quality of A.M.-settled NDX options.
    \24\ See Notice, supra note 3 at 13192.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also considered whether the move from A.M.-settlement
to P.M.-settlement for Friday NDX weekly expirations led to changes in
spreads for those contracts.\25\ The Exchange states that it sees no
evidence of deterioration of spreads associated with the introduction
of P.M.-settled products.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See Notice, supra note 3 at 13194. The Exchange used a
regression analysis to test whether the spread of NDX contracts
changed after the introduction of P.M.-settled index options. See
id. at 13192. In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange clarifies that the
Post variable in its regression model is meant to capture the effect
of the introduction of Friday P.M.-settled NDX options expirations
(on all but the third-Friday of the month) that occurred in January
2018. See Amendment No. 1, supra note 6.
    \26\ See Notice, supra note 3 at 13194.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange provides analysis on market capacity around the market
close, and concludes that the equity closing auctions have grown to be
substantial liquidity events that are much larger than the opening
auctions, and would therefore be better suited for handling the excess
liquidity demand created by index options settlement.\27\ The Exchange
believes the expiration of P.M.-settled options would not adversely
affect the options market or the underlying cash equities market.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See Notice, supra note 3 at 13194-13197.
    \28\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Lastly, the Exchange states that it has sufficient systems capacity
to handle P.M.-settled options on broad-based indexes with nonstandard
expirations dates and has not encountered any issues or adverse market
effects as a result of listing them.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove SR-ISE-
2023-08, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, and Grounds for Disapproval
Under Consideration

    The Commission is instituting proceedings pursuant to Section
19(b)(2)(B) of the Act \30\ to determine whether the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, should be approved or
disapproved. Institution of such proceedings is appropriate at this
time in view of the legal and policy issues raised by the proposed rule
change. Institution of proceedings does not indicate that the
Commission has reached any conclusions with respect to any of the
issues involved. Rather, as described below, the Commission seeks and
encourages interested persons to provide additional comment on the
proposed rule change to inform the Commission's analysis of whether to
approve or disapprove the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act,\31\ the Commission is
providing notice of the grounds for disapproval under consideration. As
described above, the Exchange has proposed to make permanent: (1) a
pilot program that permits the listing and trading of P.M.-settled
Weekly Expirations and EOM expirations and, (2) a pilot program that
permits the listing and trading of P.M.-settled NQX options. The
Commission is instituting proceedings to allow for additional analysis
of, and input from commenters with respect to, the proposed rule
change's consistency with the Act, and in particular, Section 6(b)(5)
of the Act, which requires, among other things, that the rules of a
national securities exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism
of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in
general, to protect investors and the public interest.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ Id.
    \32\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Procedure: Request for Written Comments

    The Commission requests that interested persons provide written
submissions of their data, views, and arguments with respect to the
issues identified above, as well as any other concerns they may have
with the proposal. In particular, the Commission invites the written
views of interested persons concerning whether the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, is consistent with Sections
6(b)(5) or any other provision of the Act, or the rules and regulations
thereunder. Although there do not appear to be any issues relevant to
approval or disapproval that would be facilitated by an oral
presentation of data, views, and arguments, the Commission will
consider, pursuant to Rule 19b-4 under the Act,\33\ any request for an
opportunity to make an oral presentation.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \34\ Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, as amended by the Securities
Acts Amendments of 1975, Public Law 94-29 (Jun. 4, 1975), grants to
the Commission flexibility to determine what type of proceeding--
either oral or notice and opportunity for written comments--is
appropriate for consideration of a particular proposal by a self-
regulatory organization. See Securities Acts Amendments of 1975,
Senate Comm. on Banking, Housing & Urban Affairs, S. Rep. No. 75,
94th Cong., 1st Sess. 30 (1975).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments regarding whether the proposed rule change, as modified by
Amendment No. 1, should be approved or disapproved by June 27, 2023.
Any person who wishes to file a rebuttal to any other person's
submission must file that rebuttal by July 11, 2023. The Commission
asks that commenters address the sufficiency of the Exchange's
statements in support of the proposal, in addition to any other
comments they may wish to submit about the proposed rule change.
    Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-ISE-2023-08 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2023-08. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. Do not include
personal identifiable information in submissions; you should submit
only information that you wish to make available publicly. We may
redact in part or withhold entirely from publication submitted material
that is obscene or subject to copyright protection. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2023-08 and should be submitted by
June 27, 2023. Rebuttal comments should be submitted by July 11, 2023.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(57).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-11921 Filed 6-5-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


under PRIA 4 (Pub. L. 116-8; March 8, 2019), EPA is required to carry
out the 2015 WPS rule and is not permitted to propose or finalize
revisions to the WPS other than to the AEZ prior to October 1, 2021. As
a result of this statutory limitation, EPA has determined that EPA's
preferred path to revising the state equivalency request language at 40
CFR 170.609 would be outside the scope of what is permitted under
statute since the preferred approach would not be limited to the AEZ
requirements. While EPA is currently limited by PRIA 4 to make this
change, EPA may be able to

reexamine this recommendation starting in October 2021.

F. Recommendation To Add an AEZ ``Shelter-in-Place'' Provision for
Workers and Other Persons

    1. Comments. In addition to the requests to establish mechanisms
for state equivalency plans, two agricultural stakeholders and one SLA
requested that EPA expand the exemption offered to agricultural owners
and their immediate families to include workers and others who remain
in an enclosed structure.
    Another commenter argued that the EPA exemption allowing
agricultural owners and their immediate families to remain inside a
closed building within an AEZ would not need to be as complicated as
suggested in the proposal. The commenter suggested that instead of
naming different types of buildings, the criteria could be that
application could continue as long as all visible openings by which the
pesticide spray could enter the building--e.g., doors and windows--
appear closed, and that unnamed ``variables'' are irrelevant. The
commenter stated that what should matter from a safety perspective is
whether the spray is likely to contact someone within the AEZ, not the
relationship between the owner of the agricultural establishment and
the person in the AEZ. They argue this suggestion would eliminate the
arbitrary distinction in the proposal that affords different
protections to people in the owner's immediate family and those who are
not. Further, the commenter argues that an applicator could determine
more quickly and easily whether he or she needed to suspend application
simply by looking at the exterior of the building, rather than entering
the building.
    2. EPA Response. EPA disagrees with the commenters' recommendations
to extend the exemption to remain in the AEZ to anyone provided they
remain in an enclosed structure (i.e., ``shelter-in-place''). EPA had
considered addressing this issue through development of an exception to
the AEZ requirement that would consider and identify appropriate
conditions that would allow people to remain in a building or structure
in the AEZ. EPA believes that conditions vary too much for EPA to
establish a generally applicable ``shelter-in-place'' provision, and
would be better suited to narrowly-targeted ``shelter-in-place''
provisions developed by SLAs based upon the circumstances and need
within their jurisdictions. However, as indicated previously, EPA's
preferred path for developing state equivalency mechanisms and revising
the language under 40 CFR 170.609 is currently limited by PRIA 4. EPA
may reexamine this issue again if and when EPA has the authority to
reconsider other aspects of the WPS.

G. Other Recommendations and Revisions

    1. Definitions. a. Application Exclusion Zone.
    i. Current rule and proposal. Under 40 CFR 170.305, the application
exclusion zone means ``the area surrounding the application equipment
that must be free of all persons other than appropriately trained and
equipped handlers during pesticide applications.''
    Under the proposed rule, EPA proposed to change the definition to
mean ``the area surrounding the application equipment from which
persons generally must be excluded during pesticide applications.''
    The proposed change was intended to reflect the various proposed
revisions limiting the AEZ to within the boundaries of the
establishment and addressing easements within establishment boundaries
and allowing an owner's immediate family to remain in an enclosed
building within an AEZ during an application.
    ii. Comments and Responses.
    Comments. One commenter recommended that EPA revise the definition
of AEZ to mean ``the area surrounding the point(s) of pesticide
discharge from the application equipment that must be free of all
persons during pesticide applications, other than those persons noted
under 40 CFR 170.405(a)(2) and 170.601(a)(1).'' The commenter stated
that definition of the AEZ as proposed was unclear and even EPA's
explanation of it was inconsistent, which will make compliance and
enforcement difficult. For example, the April 2016 and February 2018
guidances both show graphics in which the AEZ is measured from the
entirety of the pesticide application equipment for a ground sprayer.
However, the February 2018 adds a graphic for an aerial spray in which
the AEZ is measured from the points of pesticide discharge for an
aerial sprayer. The two graphics are side by side in the February 2018
guidance.
    In addition to this revised definition, the commenter recommended
that to be consistent with this recommended definition, similar
language should be added at 40 CFR 170.405(a)(1)(i) and
170.405(a)(1)(ii) to be clear that the AEZ distance is determined from
the point(s) of pesticide discharge from the application equipment.
    EPA Response. EPA agrees with the commenter and revised the final
regulatory text when discussing measuring the AEZ from the points of
pesticide discharge to ``the area surrounding the point(s) of pesticide
discharge from the application equipment that must generally be free of
all persons during pesticide applications;'' this recommended change is
a commonsense revision to the definition and regulatory text that helps
to improve the clarity of the rule and is consistent with EPA's past
outreach on the AEZ requirements. EPA did not include as part of the
definition ``other than those persons noted under Sec.  170.405(a)(2)
and Sec.  170.601(a)(1).'' The limits to the AEZ boundaries,
exceptions, and exemptions are addressed through the responsibilities
of the agricultural employer or handler during applications within an
AEZ, and regulatory text is found at Sec. Sec.  170.405(a)(2),
170.505(b) and 170.601(a)(1), respectively. However, EPA has revised
the definition to clarify that exclusion is the general rule, to which
there are exceptions.
    b. Easements. i. Current rule and proposal. Under the current rule,
there is no definition or exception associated with easements. EPA
proposed to allow applications to be made or resume while persons not
employed by the establishment are present on easements that may exist
within the boundaries of agricultural establishments, because,
depending on the terms of the easement, the owner or agricultural
employer may be unable to control the movement of people (e.g., utility
workers) within an easement. The proposal to address people not
employed by the establishment who are in an area subject to an easement
(e.g., utility workers) provides regulatory relief to handlers and
agricultural employers and may prevent disruptions to pesticide
applications. Despite this proposed change, EPA did not define the
meaning of an ``easement.''
    ii. Comment and Response.
    Comment. One commenter stated that adding the exception to the AEZ
beyond the boundary of the establishment where handlers do not have the
ability to control the movement of people off the establishment or
within easements allows a more reasonable approach on shared property.
However, the commenter felt that without a definition of ``easement'',
the interpretation of such is left up to each state or historical
elucidation. The commenter stated that ``easement'' is commonly defined
as ``a nonpossessory right to use and/or enter onto the real property
of another without possessing it,'' which allows some relief of the AEZ
requirements along utility or roadway rights-of-ways

that are clearly an ``easement.'' However, there is the challenge of
unintentional consequences if the term is not defined on properties
such as driveways, access roads, etc. A definition of ``easement''
should be added to clarify exactly how EPA is defining ``easement'' to
ensure consistency in the interpretation of the rule.
    EPA Response. EPA's intention for the easement exception was to
recognize that some persons may have a legal right to be on parts of an
agricultural establishment independent of the agricultural employer's
control, and for their presence not to be an insurmountable obstacle to
pesticide application provided the pesticide could be applied without
contacting such persons. Whether a person has such a legal right is a
matter of state law, so it seems inappropriate for EPA to try to impose
a national definition of ``easement'' in the WPS. EPA agrees that the
commenter's definition of ``easement'' is a common definition; however,
EPA does not think that including it in the rule would substantially
aid in interpretation or implementation.
    2. Making the AEZ Based on Wind Direction. a. Current rule and
proposal. Under the current rule, for aerial, air blast, fumigations,
mists, and foggers, as well as ground applications with fine or smaller
droplet sizes (less than 294 microns VMD), the AEZ area encompasses 100
feet from the application equipment in all directions. For ground
applications with medium or larger droplet sizes (VMD greater than 294
microns) and a spray height of more than 12 inches from the ground, the
area encompasses 25 feet from the application equipment in all
directions. For all other applications, there is no AEZ.
    In the proposed rule, EPA proposed to limit the criteria for 100-
foot AEZ distances for outdoor production to pesticide applications
made by any of the following methods: (1) Aerially; (2) by air blast or
air-propelled applications; or (3) as a fumigant, smoke, mist, or fog.
Additionally, the proposal set to establish a 25-foot AEZ for all
sprayed applications made from a height greater than 12 inches from the
soil surface or planting medium, and no longer differentiate between
sprayed applications based on the droplet size of 294 microns or other
factors for setting different AEZ distances for outdoor production.
    b. Comments and Responses.
    i. Comments. Three commenters recommended improving implementation
of the AEZ without compromising the safety of workers by making the AEZ
based on wind direction. These commenters suggest that the AEZ should
only apply to the downwind side of the applicator as drift only moves
downwind. They argued that, for example, aerial applicators have the
tools necessary to provide immediate onsite wind direction measurement
so if wind direction does change during the application they can
respond immediately. The commenters indicated that the labels for some
products are reflective of this concept and offer evidence supporting
the concept of buffer zones based on wind direction and believe this
same logic should also be applied to the AEZ.
    ii. EPA Response. EPA disagrees with this recommendation, as it
would make the requirements of the AEZ more complex rather than less.
This recommendation could also lead to workers being placed too close
to applications based on wind direction, resulting in potential
pesticide exposures with sudden shifts in wind direction during
application. By maintaining an omnidirectional AEZ (i.e., an AEZ around
the application equipment in all directions), the AEZ will provide a
margin of security against changes in wind direction for those on the
establishment who may be near the ongoing application but are not
properly trained and equipped handlers participating in the
application.
    3. Recommendation to Reduce Redundancy. a. Comment. One commenter
suggested the following change presented in the proposal to make the
final rule text less redundant:
     In 40 CFR 170.505(b)(1), remove ``, other than an
appropriately trained and equipped handler involved in the
application,'' because this language was repeated in the proposed text
at 40 CFR 170.505(b)(1)(i).
    b. EPA Response. EPA agrees with the commenter and has removed,
``other than an appropriately trained and equipped hander involved in
the application'' from the final regulatory text in 40 CFR
170.505(b)(1) since it is repeated in 40 CFR 170.505(b)(1)(i).
    Additionally, while not explicitly mentioned in any public comment,
EPA has made a similar edit from the proposed to final rule to remove
the redundant text, ``. . . within the boundaries of the agricultural
establishment . . . ,'' in 40 CFR 170.501(3)(xi) since that
clarification is previously stated in the sentence.

VI. Severability

    The Agency intends that the provisions of this rule be severable.
In the event that any individual provision or part of this rule is
invalidated, the Agency intends that this would not render the entire
rule invalid, and that any individual provisions that can continue to
operate will be left in place.

VII. References

    The following is a listing of the documents that are specifically
referenced in this document. The docket includes these documents and
other information considered by EPA, including documents that are
referenced within the documents that are included in the docket, even
if the referenced document is not physically located in the docket. For
assistance in locating these other documents, please consult the person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
1. EPA. Pesticides; Agricultural Worker Protection Standard Revisions;
Final Rule. Federal Register. 80 FR 67496, November 2, 2015 (FRL-9931-
81).
2. EPA. Pesticides; Agricultural Worker Protection Standard; Revision
of the Application Exclusion Zone Requirements; Proposed Rule. Federal
Register. 84 FR 58666, November 1, 2019 (FRL-9995-47).
3. EPA. Cost Analysis for Revisions to the Application Exclusion Zone
in the Worker Protection Standard. 2020.
4. U.S. Senate. S. Rep. No. 92-883 (Part II), 92nd Congress, 2nd
Session at 43-46 (1972). U.S. Code Congressional and Administrative
News 1972, p. 4063.
5. North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services
(NCDA&CS). Letter from James W. Burnette, Jr., Director NCDA&CS, to
James J. Jones, Assistant Administrator, OCSPP. December 4, 2015.
6. EPA. WPS Guidance on the Application Exclusion Zone. Q&A Fact Sheet
on the Worker Protection Standard (WPS) Application Exclusion Zone
(AEZ) Requirements. April 14, 2016. Available at https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0543-0007.
7. AAPCO. Letter from Dennis W. Howard, President, to Jack Housenger,
Office Director, Office of Pesticide Programs. August 17, 2016.
Available online at https://aapco.files.wordpress.com/2016/11/letter-to-jack-housenger-wps_aez.pdf.
8. NASDA. Letter from Nathan Bowen, Director, Public Policy, to
Administrator Gina McCarthy. November 16, 2016. Available

online at https://www.nasda.org/letters-comments-testimony/nasda-letter-requesting-extension-for-worker-protection-standard-implementation-timeline.
9. EPA. Reference List of Public Comments Regarding the Worker
Protection Standard Submitted to Docket EPA-HQ-OA-2017-0190. List
available at https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0543-0005.
10. EPA. Transcript from PPDC Meeting on May 4, 2017. Available online
at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2017-07/documents/may-4-2017-ppdc-meeting-transcript.pdf.
11. EPA. Transcript from PPDC Meeting on November 2, 2017. Available
online at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2018-01/documents/november-2-2017-ppdc-meeting-transcript.pdf.
12. EPA. Worker Protection Standard Application Exclusion Zone
Requirements: Updated Questions and Answers. February 15, 2018.
Available at https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0543-0008.
13. EPA. Pesticides; Agricultural Worker Protection Standard; Revision
of the Application Exclusion Zone Requirements; Response to Comments on
the Proposed Rule. 2020.
14. EPA, Office of Inspector General, EPA Needs to Evaluate the Impact
of the Revised Agricultural Worker Protection Standard on Pesticide
Exposure Incidents, Report No. 18-P-0080 (Feb. 15, 2018) (``OIG
Report''). Available online at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2018-02/documents/_epaoig_20180215-18-p-0080.pdf.
15. EPA. How to Comply with the 2015 Revised Worker Protection Standard
for Agricultural Pesticides: What Owners and Employers Need to Know.
2016.
16. EPA. Inspection Manual: Worker Protection Standard Inspection
Manual. 2018.
17. EPA. Economic Analysis of the Agricultural Worker Protection
Standard Revisions. September 2015 (RIN 2070-AJ22). Available at
https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0184-2522.
18. Association of Farmworker Opportunity Programs (AFOP). 2019
Training Data Report. AFOP, Farmworker Health & Safety Programs report
developed with EPA grant #83597001, Occupational Safety and Health
Administration Susan Harwood Training Program Funds grant #SH-05004-SH,
and W.K. Kellogg Foundation grant #P3033500. January 2020.
19. Felsot et al. Agrochemical Spray Drift; Assessment and Mitigation--
A Review, 46 J. Envtl. Sci. Health Part B 1. 2010. Provided in comment
by Earthjustice et al.
20. Kasner et al., Spray Drift from a Conventional Axial Fan Airblast
Sprayer in a Modern Orchard Work Environment, 62 Annals of Work
Exposures and Health 1134. 2018. Provided in comment by Earthjustice et
al.

VIII. FIFRA Review Requirements

    Under FIFRA section 25, EPA has submitted a draft of the final rule
to the Secretary of the Department of Agriculture (USDA), the FIFRA
Scientific Advisory Panel (SAP), and the appropriate Congressional
Committees. USDA reviewed the draft final rule during the interagency
review mentioned in Unit IX.A. and waived further review on October 7,
2020. Since there are no science issues warranting review, the FIFRA
SAP waived a detailed review on October 12, 2020.

IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.

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

    This action is a significant regulatory action that was submitted
to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review under Executive
Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011). Any changes made in response to OMB recommendations
have been documented in the docket. EPA prepared a cost analysis
associated with this action, which is briefly summarized in Unit I.E.
and is available in the docket (Ref. 3).

B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling
Regulatory Costs

    This action is a deregulatory action as specified in Executive
Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 3, 2017). The EPA cost analysis
associated with this action is briefly summarized in Unit I.E. and is
available in the docket (Ref. 3).

C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose any new information collection burden
under the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. OMB has previously approved the
information collection activities contained in the existing regulations
and has assigned OMB control number 2070-0190. This rule does not
impose or modify any information collection burdens because the AEZ
requirements are not associated with any information collection
activities that require approval under the PRA.

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA, 5
U.S.C. 601 et seq. In making this determination, the impact of concern
is any significant adverse economic impact on small entities. An agency
may certify that a rule will not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities if the rule relieves burden or
has no net burden on the small entities subject to the rule. The
changes to the AEZ requirements in this rule will reduce the impacts on
all entities subject to the rule, so there are no significant impacts
to any small entities. EPA has therefore concluded that this action
will relieve regulatory burden for all directly regulated small
entities.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain an unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. The rule requirements will primarily affect
agricultural employers and commercial pesticide handler employers. This
action is also expected to be a burden-reducing action because removing
the requirements should reduce the complexity of arranging and
conducting a pesticide application. The cost analysis associated with
this action is briefly summarized in Unit I.E. and is available in the
docket (Ref. 3). As such, the requirements of sections 202, 203, 204,
or 205 of UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, do not apply to this action.

F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications as defined in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because 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.

G. 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, November 9, 2000), because it will
not have any effect on tribal governments, on the relationship between
the Federal Government and the Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian
tribes. There are no costs to Tribes associated with these changes
because the WPS is implemented through the pesticide label, so changes
to the regulation do not impose any new obligations on the part of
Tribes. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

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

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant as defined
in Executive Order 12866, and because EPA does not believe the
environmental health or safety risks addressed by this action present a
disproportionate risk to children. This determination is discussed in
more detail in Unit IV.F.

I. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations 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.

J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards that would
require Agency consideration under NTTAA section 12(d), 15 U.S.C. 272.

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

    EPA believes that this action does not have disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority
populations, low-income populations and/or indigenous peoples, as
specified in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). A
more detailed discussion of this determination is provided in Unit
IV.F.

L. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

    This action is subject to the CRA, 5 U.S.C. 801-808, and EPA will
submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to the
Comptroller General of the United States. This action is not a ``major
rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 170

    Environmental protection, agricultural worker, employer, farms,
forests, greenhouses, nurseries, pesticides, pesticide handler, worker
protection standard.

Andrew Wheeler,
Administrator.

    Therefore, for the reasons set forth in the preamble, 40 CFR
chapter I, subchapter R is amended as follows:

PART 170--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 170 continues to read:

    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136-136w.

Sec.  170.305  Definitions.

0
2. Amend Sec.  170.305 by revising the definition of Application
exclusion zone to read as follows:
* * * * *
    Application exclusion zone means the area surrounding the point(s)
of pesticide discharge from the application equipment that must
generally be free of all persons during pesticide applications.
* * * * *

0
3. Amend Sec.  170.405 by revising paragraphs (a)(1)(i) and (ii) and
(a)(2) to read as follows:

Sec.  170.405  Entry restrictions associated with pesticide
applications.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) The application exclusion zone is the area that extends 100
feet horizontally from the point(s) of pesticide discharge from the
application equipment in all directions during application when the
pesticide is applied by any of the following methods:
    (A) Aerially.
    (B) Air blast or air-propelled applications.
    (C) As a fumigant, smoke, mist, or fog.
    (ii) The application exclusion zone is the area that extends 25
feet horizontally from the point(s) of pesticide discharge from the
application equipment in all directions during application when the
pesticide is sprayed from a height of greater than 12 inches from the
soil surface or planting medium and not as in paragraph (a)(1)(i) of
this section.
* * * * *
    (2) During any outdoor production pesticide application, the
agricultural employer must not allow or direct any worker or other
person to enter or to remain in the treated area or an application
exclusion zone that is within the boundaries of the establishment until
the application is complete, except for:
    (i) Appropriately trained and equipped handlers involved in the
application, and
    (ii) Persons not employed by the establishment in an area subject
to an easement that prevents the agricultural employer from temporarily
excluding those persons from that area.
    (iii) Owners of the agricultural establishment and their immediate
family members who remain inside closed buildings, housing, or shelters
on the establishment under the conditions specified in Sec.
170.601(a)(1)(vi).
* * * * *

0
4. Amend Sec.  170.501 by revising paragraph (c)(3)(xi) to read as
follows:

Sec.  170.501  Training requirements for handlers.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (xi) Handlers must suspend a pesticide application if workers or
other persons are in the application exclusion zone within the
boundaries of the agricultural establishment and must not resume the
application while workers or other persons remain in the application
exclusion zone, except for appropriately trained and equipped handlers
involved in the application, persons not employed by the establishment
in an area subject to an easement that prevents the agricultural
employer from temporarily excluding those persons from that area, and
the owner(s) of the agricultural establishment and members of their
immediate families who remain inside closed buildings, housing, or
shelters on the establishment, provided that the handlers have been
expressly instructed by the owner(s) of the agricultural establishment
that only immediate family members remain inside those closed
buildings, housing, or shelters and that the application should proceed
despite the presence of the owner(s) or their immediate family members
inside those closed buildings, housing, or shelters.
* * * * *

0
5. Amend Sec.  170.505 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:

Sec.  170.505  Requirements during applications to protect handlers,
workers, and other persons.

* * * * *
    (b) Suspending applications. (1) Any handler performing a pesticide
application must immediately suspend the pesticide application if any
worker or other person is in an application exclusion zone described in
Sec.  170.405(a)(1) that is within the boundaries of the agricultural
establishment or the area specified in column B of the Table in Sec.
170.405(b)(4), except for:
    (i) Appropriately trained and equipped handlers involved in the
application,
    (ii) Persons not employed by the establishment in an area subject
to an easement that prevents the agricultural employer from temporarily
excluding those persons from that area, and
    (iii) The owner(s) of the agricultural establishment and members of
their immediate families who remain inside closed buildings, housing,
or shelters on the establishment, provided that the handlers have been
expressly instructed by the owner(s) of the agricultural establishment
that only immediate family members remain inside those closed
buildings, housing, or shelters and that the application should proceed
despite the presence of the owner(s) or their immediate family members
inside those closed buildings, housing, or shelters.
    (2) A handler must not resume a suspended pesticide application
while any workers or other persons remain in an application exclusion
zone described in Sec.  170.405(a)(1) that is within the boundaries of
the agricultural establishment or the area specified in column B of the
Table in Sec.  170.405(b)(4), except for:
    (i) Appropriately trained and equipped handlers involved in the
application,
    (ii) Persons not employed by the establishment in an area subject
to an easement that prevents the agricultural employer from temporarily
excluding those persons from that area, and
    (iii) The owner(s) of the agricultural establishment and members of
their immediate families who remain inside closed buildings, housing,
or shelters on the establishment, provided that the handlers have been
expressly instructed by the owner(s) of the agricultural establishment
that only immediate family members remain inside those closed
buildings, housing, or shelters and that the application should proceed
despite the presence of the owner(s) or their immediate family members
inside those closed buildings, housing, or shelters.
* * * * *

0
6. Amend Sec.  170.601 by revising paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows:

Sec.  170.601  Exemptions.

    (a) * * *
    (1) On any agricultural establishment where a majority of the
establishment is owned by one or more members of the same immediate
family, the owner(s) of the establishment (and, where specified below,
certain handlers) are not required to provide the protections of the
following provisions to themselves or members of their immediate family
when they are performing handling activities or tasks related to the
production of agricultural plants that would otherwise be covered by
this part on their own agricultural establishment.
    (i) Section 170.309(c).
    (ii) Section 170.309(f) through (j).
    (iii) Section 170.311.
    (iv) Section 170.401.
    (v) Section 170.403.
    (vi) Sections 170.405(a)(2) and 170.505(b), but only in regard to
owner(s) of the establishment and their immediate family members who
remain inside closed buildings, housing, or shelters on the
establishment. This exception also applies to handlers (regardless of
whether they are immediate family members) who have been expressly
instructed by the owner(s) of the establishment that:
    (A) Only the owner(s) or their immediate family members remain
inside the closed building, housing, or shelter on the establishment,
and
    (B) The application should proceed despite the presence of the
owner(s) or their immediate family members remaining inside the closed
buildings, housing, or shelters on the establishment.
    (vii) Section 170.409.
    (viii) Sections 170.411 and 170.509.
    (ix) Section 170.501.
    (x) Section 170.503.
    (xi) Section 170.505(c) and (d).
    (xii) Section 170.507(c) through (e).
    (xiii) Section 170.605(a) through (c), and (e) through (j).
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2020-23411 Filed 10-29-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 52 (Thursday, March 17, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15282-15283]
[FR Doc No: 2022-05679]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[SEC File No. 270-512, OMB Control No. 3235-0570]

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Extension: Form N-CSR

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549-2736

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ``Commission'') has submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (``OMB'') a request for extension of the
previously approved collection of information discussed below.
    Form N-CSR (17 CFR 249.331 and 274.128) is a combined reporting
form used by registered management investment companies (``funds'') to
file certified shareholder reports under the Investment Company Act of
1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a-1 et seq.) (``Investment Company Act'') and the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.) (``Exchange
Act''). Specifically, Form N-CSR is to be used for reports under
section 30(b)(2) of the Investment Company Act (15 U.S.C. 80a-29(b)(2))
and section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) and
78o(d)), filed pursuant to rule 30b2-1(a) under the Investment Company
Act (17 CFR 270.30b2-1(a)). Reports on Form N-CSR are to be filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') no later than
10 days after the transmission to stockholders of any report that is
required to be transmitted to stockholders under rule 30e-1 under the
Investment Company Act (17 CFR 270.30e-1). The information filed with
the Commission permits the verification of compliance with securities
law requirements and assures the public availability and dissemination
of the information.
    The following estimates of average burden hours and costs are made
solely for purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 \1\ and are
not derived from a comprehensive or even representative survey or study
of the cost of Commission rules and forms. Compliance with Form N-CSR
is mandatory. Responses to the collection of information will not be
kept confidential.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The current total annual burden hour inventory for Form N-CSR is
181,167 hours.\2\ The hour burden estimates for preparing and filing
reports on Form N-CSR are based on the Commission's experience with the
contents of the form. The number of burden hours may vary depending on,
among other things, the complexity of the filing and whether
preparation of the reports is performed by internal staff or outside
counsel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ This estimate is based on the following calculation: 179,443
(previous burden estimate) + 1,724.5 (additional internal burden) =
181,167.5 hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission's new estimate of burden hours that will be imposed
by Form N-CSR is as follows:

                                           Table 1--Summary of Revised Burden Hours for Reports on Form N-CSR
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Funds and filings                     Annual time burden (hours)
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of     Number of total  Hour burden per    Total annual
                                                                     Number of funds   annual filings      filings      fund per filing    hour burden
                                                                                (A)              (B)                (C) = (A) x (B)(D)          (E) = (C) x (D)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Form N-CSR.........................................................      14,654 \3\                2           29,308             7.75          227,137
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In total, the Commission estimates it will take 227,137 burden
hours per year for all funds to prepare and file reports on Form N-CSR.
Commission staff estimates that the annual cost of outside services
associated with Form N-CSR is approximately $203 per fund and the total
annual external cost burden for Form N-CSR is $5,949,524.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ This estimate is based on the number of registered
management companies as calculated by the filing type: 1,403 N-1A
registrants (13,248 funds); 693 N-2 registrants (691 funds); 5 N-3
registrants (14 funds); 417 N-4 registrants (418 funds); 235 N-6
registrants (236 funds); 47 N-8B-2 registrants (47 funds).
    \4\ This estimate is based on the following calculation: 14,654
funds x $203 per filing x 2 filings per year = $5,949,524.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Estimates of average burden hours and costs are made solely for the
purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act, and are not derived from a
comprehensive or even representative survey or study of the costs of
Commission rules and forms. Compliance with the collection of
information requirements of Form N-CSR is mandatory. Responses to the
collection of information will not be kept confidential. An agency may
not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a
collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number.
    The public may view the background documentation for this
information collection at the following website, www.reginfo.gov.
Comments should be directed to: (i) Desk Officer for the Securities and
Exchange Commission, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget, Room 10102, New Executive Office
Building, Washington, DC 20503, or by sending an email to:
[email protected]; and (ii) David Bottom, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o John R.
Pezzullo 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549 or send an email to:
[email protected]. Written comments and recommendations for the
proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of
publication of this notice April 18, 2022 to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular information collection by selecting
``Currently under 30-day Review--Open for Public Comments'' or by using
the search function.

    Dated: March 14, 2022.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-05679 Filed 3-16-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 123 (Wednesday, June 26, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 38195-38197]
[FR Doc No: 2013-15001]

========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.

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

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 123 / Wednesday, June 26, 2013 /
Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0447; Directorate Identifier 2013-NE-17-AD;
Amendment 39-17488; AD 2013-10-52]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; General Electric Company Turbofan
Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
General Electric Company (GE) GE90-110B1 and GE90-115B turbofan
engines. This emergency AD was sent previously to all known U.S. owners
and operators of these engines. This AD prohibits operation of an
airplane with affected transfer gearbox assemblies (TGBs) installed on
both engines five days after the effective date of this AD. This AD was
prompted by reports of two failures of TGBs which resulted in in-flight
shutdowns (IFSDs). We are issuing this AD to prevent additional IFSDs
of one or more engines, loss of thrust control, and damage to the
airplane.

DATES: This AD is effective June 26, 2013 to all persons except those
persons to whom it was made immediately effective by Emergency AD 2013-
10-52, issued on May 16, 2013, which contained the requirements of this
amendment.
    We must receive comments on this AD by August 12, 2013.

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 http://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 service information identified in this AD, contact General
Electric Company, GE-Aviation, Room 285, 1 Neumann Way, Cincinnati,
Ohio 45215; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Examining the AD Docket

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jason Yang, Aerospace Engineer, Engine
Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:
781-238-7199; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    On May 16, 2013, we issued Emergency AD 2013-10-52, which prohibits
operation of an airplane with affected TGBs installed on both engines
five days after receipt of the emergency AD. The emergency AD was sent
previously to all known U.S. owners and operators of these GE90-110B1
and GE90-115B turbofan engines. This action was prompted by reports of
two failures of TGBs which resulted in IFSDs. Investigation has
revealed that the failures were caused by TGB radial gear cracking and
separation. Further inspections found two additional radial gears with
cracks. This condition, if not corrected, could result in additional
IFSDs of one or more engines, loss of thrust control, and damage to the
airplane.

Relevant Service Information

    We reviewed GE GE90-100 Series Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) No.
GE90-100 S/B 72-A0558, Revision 1, dated May 14, 2013, and GE90-100
Series ASB No. GE90-100 S/B 72-A0559, dated May 14, 2013. The ASBs
provide additional information regarding the affected TGBs.

FAA's Determination

    We are issuing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.

AD Requirements

    This AD prohibits operation of an airplane with affected TGBs
installed on both engines five days after the effective date of this
AD.

Interim Action

    We consider this AD to be an interim action. We anticipate that
further AD action will follow.

FAA's Determination of the Effective Date

    An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of
this AD. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public justifies
waiving notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule because of
the five-day compliance time. Therefore, we find that notice and
opportunity for prior public comment are impracticable and that good
cause exists for making this amendment effective in less than 30 days.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety and was not preceded by notice and an opportunity for public
comment. However, we invite you to send any written data, views, or
arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under
the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number FAA-2013-0447 and
Directorate Identifier 2013-NE-17-AD at the beginning of your comments.
We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We will consider all
comments

received by the closing date and may amend this AD because of those
comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 20 engines installed on airplanes
of U.S. registry, and because the compliance is only an airplane
operation prohibition, the cost of compliance on U.S. operators is $0.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2013-10-52 General Electric Company: Amendment 39-17488; Docket No.
FAA-2013-0447; Directorate Identifier 2013-NE-17-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective June 26, 2013 to
all persons except those persons to whom it was made immediately
effective by Emergency AD 2013-10-52, issued on May 16, 2013, which
contained the requirements of this amendment.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    General Electric Company (GE) GE90-110B1 and GE90-115B turbofan
engines with a transfer gearbox assembly (TGB), part number
2115M33G07 or 2115M33G08, serial number (S/N) listed in Figure 1 to
paragraph (c) of this AD, installed.

                            Figure 1 to Paragraph (c)--Transfer Gearbox Assembly S/Ns
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FIA0HYRT                       FIA0JGE8                       FIA0J3YC                       FIA0JRTW
FIA0HV16                       FIA0JEH2                       FIA0JEH3                       FIA0K4M6
FIA0J31V                       FIA0JGE7                       FIA0JAVL                       FIA0JN33
FIA0H0R1                       FIA0JLAV                       FIA0J70G                       FIA0K7TV
FIA0J3YE                       FIA0JLAY                       FIA0HV18                       FIA0K56H
FIA0J1L0                       FIA0JGFC                       FIA0J70E                       FIA0K7TY
FIA0J3YF                       FIA0JN31                       FIA0JGE9                       FIA0K7TW
FIA0J7FF                       FIA0JN3Y                       FIA0JLAW                       FIA0K4M5
FIA0J5LR                       FIA0JGFF                       FIA0H0R3                       FIA0K56G
FIA0J7FH                       FIA0JN30                       FIA0JGE6                       FIA0JN32
FIA0J7FC                       FIA0J7Y9                       FIA0JT56                       FIAAV6M1
FIA0J70A                       FIA0JAVM                       FIA0JT57                       FIA0K7T1
FIA0J7Y8                       FIA0JGFA                       FIA0J7FE                       FIAAP6C4
FIA0J7Y7                       FIA0JLAT                       FIA0JT6K                       FIA0K7T0
FIA0J31W                       FIA0JT58                       FIA0JT6L                       FIAATMYA
FIA0J70C                       FIA0K2H1                       FIA0JLAR                       FIA0K56K
FIA0JAVH                       FIA0HP4Y                       FIA0JRT5                       FIAATH0T
FIA0J7FG                       FIA0HV17                       FIA0JRT4                       FIA0K56J
FIA0J70F                       FIA0HV19                       FIA0JT6J                       FIAAPA8T
FIA0JAVK                       FIA0HWG3                       FIA0K2H4                       FIAAVTMA
FIA0JEH4                       FIA0J3YG                       FIA0JRTV                       FIA0JRTY
FIA0J5LY                       FIA0H0R0                       FIA0K2H2                       FIAAR7C0
FIA0J5LT                       FIA0HYRV                       FIA0K2H3                       FIAARW1V
FIA0J5LW                       FIA0H0R2                       FIA0K4M2                       FIA07PAN
FIA0JEH5                       FIA0J1LY                       FIA0K4M4                       FIA06VPP
FIA0JAVJ                       FIA0J31T                       FIA0JT59                       F1A03RR4
FIA0JGE5                       FIA0J1LW                       FIA0K2H5                       FIA0JGFE
FIA0JEH6                       FIA0J5LV                       FIA0K4M1                       FIA02N6R
FIA0JGEH                       FIA0HYRR                       FIA0K56L                       ...................
FIA0J1LV                       FIA0J31R                       FIA0K4M3                       ...................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(d) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of two failures of TGBs which
resulted in in-flight shutdowns (IFSDs). We are issuing this AD to
prevent additional IFSDs of one or more engines, loss of thrust
control, and damage to the airplane.

(e) Compliance

    (1) Comply with this AD within the compliance time specified,
unless already done.
    (2) Before further flight, do not operate the airplane if more
than one installed engine has a TGB S/N listed in Figure 1 to
paragraph (c) of this AD.

(f) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    The Manager, Engine Certification Office, FAA, may approve AMOCs
for this AD. Use the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19 to make your
request.

(g) Related Information

    (1) For further information about this AD, contact: Jason Yang,
Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine &
Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA
01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) GE GE90-100 Series Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) No. GE90-100
S/B 72-A0558, Revision 1, dated May 14, 2013, and GE90-100 Series
ASB No. GE90-100 S/B 72-A0559, dated May 14, 2013, pertain to the
subject of this AD.
    (3) For the service information referenced in this AD, contact:
General Electric Company, GE-Aviation, Room 285, 1 Neumann Way,
Cincinnati, Ohio 45215; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Engine &
Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington,
MA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on June 13, 2013.
Frank P. Paskiewicz,
Acting Director, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-15001 Filed 6-25-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 137 (Wednesday, July 17, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42692-42693]
[FR Doc No: 2013-17104]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2012-0199]

Safety Zone; Chicago Harbor, Navy Pier Southeast, Chicago, IL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of enforcement of regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce the Navy Pier Southeast Safety
Zone in Chicago Harbor during specified periods from July 3, 2013,
through August 31, 2013. This action is necessary and intended to
ensure safety of life on the navigable waters of the United States
immediately prior to, during, and immediately after fireworks events.
Enforcement of this safety zone will activate restrictions and control
movement of vessels in a specified area immediately prior to, during,
and immediately after various fireworks events. During the enforcement
period, no person or vessel may enter the safety zone without
permission of the Captain of the Port, Lake Michigan.

DATES: The regulations in 33 CFR 165.931 will be enforced at the
specified dates and times listed in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section that follows.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this notice,
call or email MST1 Joseph McCollum, Prevention Department, Coast Guard
Sector Lake Michigan, Milwaukee, WI at

414-747-7148, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard will enforce the Safety
Zone; Chicago Harbor, Navy Pier Southeast, Chicago, IL listed in 33 CFR
165.931 for the following events:
    (1) Navy Pier Fireworks with times and dates as follows:
    July 17, 2013 from 9:15 p.m. through 9:45 p.m.;
    July 20, 2013 from 10:00 p.m. through 10:30 p.m.;
    July 24, 2013 from 9:15 p.m. through 9:45 p.m.;
    July 27, 2013 from 10:00 p.m. through 10:30 p.m.;
    July 31, 2013 from 9:15 p.m. through 9:45 p.m.;
    August 3, 2013 from 10:00 p.m. through 10:30 p.m.;
    August 7, 2013 from 9:15 p.m. through 9:45 p.m.;
    August 8, 2013 from 9:15 p.m. through 9:45 p.m.;
    August 9, 2013 from 10:00 p.m. through 10:30 p.m.;
    August 10, 2013 from 10:00 p.m. through 10:30 p.m.;
    August 14, 2013 from 9:15 p.m. through 9:45 p.m.;
    August 17, 2013 from 10:00 p.m. through 10:30 p.m.;
    August 21, 2013 from 9:15 p.m. through 9:45 p.m.;
    August 24, 2013 from 10:00 p.m. through 10:30 p.m.;
    August 28, 2013 from 9:15 p.m. through 9:45 p.m.;
    August 31, 2013 from 10:00 p.m. through 10:30 p.m.
    This safety zone encompasses the waters of Lake Michigan within
Chicago Harbor between the east end of the Chicago Lock guide wall and
the Chicago Harbor breakwater beginning at 41[deg]53'24'' N,
087[deg]35'26'' W; then south to 41[deg]53'09'' N, 087[deg]35'26'' W;
then west to 41[deg]53'09'' N, 087[deg]36'09'' W; then north to
41[deg]53'24'' N, 087[deg]36'09'' W; then back to the point of origin.
All vessels must obtain permission from the Captain of the Port, Lake
Michigan, or his or her on-scene representative to enter, move within
or exit the safety zone. Vessels and persons granted permission to
enter the safety zone shall obey all lawful orders or directions of the
Captain of the Port, Lake Michigan, or his or her on-scene
representative.
    This notice is issued under authority of 33 CFR 165.931 and 5
U.S.C. 552(a). In addition to this notice in the Federal Register, the
Coast Guard will provide the maritime community with advance
notification of these enforcement periods via broadcast Notice to
Mariners or Local Notice to Mariners. If the Captain of the Port, Lake
Michigan, determines that the safety zone need not be enforced for the
full duration stated in this notice, he or she may use a Broadcast
Notice to Mariners to grant general permission to enter the safety
zone. The Captain of the Port, Lake Michigan, or his or her on-scene
representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16.

    Dated: July 1, 2013.
M.W. Sibley,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Lake Michigan.
[FR Doc. 2013-17104 Filed 7-16-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: March 30, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 60)]
[Notices]
[Page 15771-15772]
[DOCID:fr30mr10-145]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No. PE-2010-08]

Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of petition for exemption received.

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

SUMMARY: This notice contains a summary of a petition seeking relief
from specified requirements of 14 CFR. The purpose of this notice is to
improve the public's awareness of, and participation in, this aspect of
FAA's regulatory activities. Neither publication of this notice nor the
inclusion or omission of information in the summary is intended to
affect the legal status of the petition or its final disposition.

DATES: Comments on this petition must identify the petition docket
number involved and must be received on or before April 19, 2010.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments identified by Docket Number FAA-2007-
0323 using any of the following methods:
     Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to the Docket Management Facility;
U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590.
     Fax: Fax comments to the Docket Management Facility at
202-493-2251.
     Hand Delivery: Bring comments to the Docket Management
Facility in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Privacy: We will post all comments we receive, without change, to
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. Using the search function of our docket Web site, anyone can
find and read the comments received into any of our dockets, including
the name of the individual sending the comment (or signing the comment
for an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).
    Docket: To read background documents or comments received, go to
http://www.regulations.gov at any time or to the Docket Management
Facility in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kenna Sinclair, ANM-113, (425) 227-
1556, Federal Aviation Administration, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
WA 98057-3356; or Ralen Gao,<PHONE_NUMBER>, Office of Rulemaking (ARM-
1), Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20591.
    This notice is published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on March 24, 2010.
Pamela Hamilton-Powell,
Director, Office of Rulemaking.

Petition for Exemption

    Docket No.: FAA-2007-0323.
    Petitioner: The Boeing Company.
    Section of 14 CFR Affected: Sec. Sec.  25.785(j), 25.857(e), and
25.1447(c)(1).
    Description of Relief Sought: Boeing requests adding a lock on
access doors between the occupied area and the cargo compartment on its
Model 777F freighters. This feature would prevent a stowaway from
gaining access to the occupied areas while retaining the in-flight
access to the cargo compartment via these doors granted by Exemption
No. 9779.

[FR Doc. 2010-7013 Filed 3-29-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P