[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 174 (Wednesday, September 9, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 54242-54248]
[FR Doc No: 2015-22031]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0506; FRL-9930-04]

Cyprodinil; Pesticide Tolerances

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
cyprodinil in or on multiple commodities that are identified and
discussed later in this document, and removes the established tolerance
on fruit, stone, group 12. Interregional Research Project Number 4

(IR-4) requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

DATES: This regulation is effective September 9, 2015. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before November 9, 2015,
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-2014-0506, 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-2014-0506 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
November 9, 2015. 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-2014-0506, 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 September 5, 2014 (79 FR 53009) (FRL-
9914-98), 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
4E8293) by IR-4, 500 College Road East, Suite 201W, Princeton, NJ
08540. The petition requested that 40 CFR part 180 be amended by
establishing tolerances for residues of the fungicide cyprodinil, 4-
cyclopropyl-6-methyl-N-phenyl-2-pyrimidinamine, in or on acerola at 1.5
parts per million (ppm); artichoke, globe at 4.0 ppm; feijoa at 1.5
ppm; fruit, stone group 12-12 at 2.0 ppm; guava at 1.5 ppm; jaboticaba
at 1.5 ppm; passionfruit at 1.5 ppm; pomegranate at 7.0 ppm; starfruit
at 1.5 ppm; and wax jambu at 1.5 ppm. This petition additionally
requested to remove the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.532 for residues of
cyprodinil in or on fruit, stone, group 12 at 2.0 ppm. That document
referenced a summary of the petition prepared on behalf of IR-4 by
Syngenta Crop Protection, the registrant, which is available in the
docket, http://www.regulations.gov. Comments were received on the
notice of filing. EPA's response to these comments is discussed in Unit
IV.C.
    Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA has
revised the proposed tolerance on pomegranate, and has revised the
commodity definition for artichoke to artichoke, globe. The reasons for
these changes are explained in Unit IV.D.

III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a
food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure.
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and
children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. . .
.''
    Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), and the factors
specified in FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the available
scientific data and other relevant information in support of this
action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a
determination on

aggregate exposure for cyprodinil including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action. EPA's assessment of exposures
and risks associated with cyprodinil follows.

A. Toxicological Profile

    EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children.
    The major target organs of cyprodinil are the liver and the kidney.
Liver effects were consistent among rats and mice in both subchronic
and chronic studies and typically included increased liver weights and
increases in serum clinical chemistry parameters, associated with
adverse effects on liver function (i.e., increased cholesterol and
phospholipid levels). Microscopic lesions in rats and mice included
hepatocyte hypertrophy and hepatocellular necrosis. In the kidneys,
chronic tubular lesions and chronic kidney inflammation following
subchronic exposure and increased kidney weights and progressive
nephropathy following chronic exposures in male rats. Chronic effects
in dogs were limited to decreased body-weight gain, decreased food
consumption and decreased food efficiency. The hematopoietic system
also appeared to be a target of cyprodinil, as mild anemia was seen
following subchronic rat exposure (reductions in hematocrit and
hemoglobin and microcytosis). Although increases in thyroid weight or
hypertrophy of thyroid follicular cells were observed at higher doses
in the 28-day and 90-day oral toxicity study in rats, treatment-related
changes in thyroid weights or gross/microscopic observations were not
observed in the chronic rat study or in other studies.
    A 28-day dietary immunotoxicity study in mice resulted in no
apparent suppression of the humoral component of the immune system. The
only effect attributed to cyprodinil treatment was higher liver weights
at the highest dose tested. There were no treatment-related effects on
spleen or thymus weights; no effects on specific activity or total
activity of splenic immunoglobulin M (IgM) antibody-forming cells to
the T cell-dependent antigen sheep red blood cells (sRBC).
    An acute neurotoxicity study indicated systemic toxicity with signs
of induced hunched posture, pilorection, and reduced responsiveness to
sensory stimuli and reduced motor activity. Clinical signs,
hypothermia, and changes in motor activity were found to be reversible
by day 8 and 15 investigations. A subchronic neurotoxicity study showed
no treatment related effects on mortality, clinical signs, or gross or
histological neuropathology. Functional observational battery (FOB) and
motor activity testing revealed no treatment related effects up to the
highest dose tested.
    There was no evidence of increased susceptibility in the
developmental rat or rabbit study following in utero exposure or in the
two-generation reproduction study following pre- and post-natal
exposure. Fetal toxicity, manifested as significantly lower fetal
weights and an increased incidence of delayed ossification in the rat
and a slight increase in litters showing extra ribs in the rabbit, was
reported in developmental toxicity studies. In a rat two-generation
reproduction study, significantly lower pup weights for F1
and F2 offspring were observed. Each of these fetal or
neonatal effects occurred at the same dose levels at which maternal
toxicity (decreased body weight gain) was observed and were considered
to be secondary to maternal toxicity.
    Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by cyprodinil as well as the no-observed-
adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-
level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at http://www.regulations.gov in document: Cyprodinil. Human Health Risk
Assessment for the Expansion of Existing Crop Group/Representative
Commodity Uses to Stone Fruit Group 12-12, and Adding New Uses on the
Artichoke, Guava, Pomegranate, Passionfruit, Feijoa, Jaboticaba, Wax
Jambu, Starfruit, and Acerola and Amended Uses on Greenhouse Cucumbers
and Small Tomatoes at pages 36-40 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-
0506.

B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern

    Once a pesticide's toxicological profile is determined, EPA
identifies toxicological points of departure (POD) and levels of
concern to use in evaluating the risk posed by human exposure to the
pesticide. For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, the toxicological POD is used as the basis for
derivation of reference values for risk assessment. PODs are developed
based on a careful analysis of the doses in each toxicological study to
determine the dose at which no adverse effects are observed (the NOAEL)
and the lowest dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified
(the LOAEL). Uncertainty/safety factors are used in conjunction with
the POD to calculate a safe exposure level--generally referred to as a
population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a reference dose (RfD)--and a safe
margin of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes
that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the
Agency estimates risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of
the adverse effect expected in a lifetime. For more information on the
general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete
description of the risk assessment process, see http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/riskassess.htm.
    A summary of the toxicological endpoints for cyprodinil used for
human risk assessment is discussed in Unit III.B. of the final rule
published in the Federal Register of October 16, 2012 (77 FR 49732)
(FRL-9359-7).

C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to cyprodinil, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-
for tolerances as well as all existing cyprodinil tolerances in 40 CFR
180.532. EPA assessed dietary exposures from cyprodinil in food as
follows:
    i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk
assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological
study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring
as a result of a 1-day or single exposure. Such effects were identified
for cyprodinil. In estimating acute dietary exposure, EPA used food
consumption information from the United States Department of
Agriculture (USDA) National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey,
What We Eat in America, (NHANES/WWEIA), from 2003 to 2008. As to
residue levels in food, EPA utilized tolerance-level residues and 100
percent crop treated (PCT) for all commodities. The acute assessment
also incorporated Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model software with the
Food Commodity Intake Database (DEEM-FCID) Version 3.18 default
processing factors; and empirical processing factors for tomato paste/
tomato puree and lemon/lime juice, where 1X empirical processing
factors were used to modify the tolerance values.

    ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the USDA NHANES/
WWEIA. As to residue levels in food, EPA utilized average field trial
residues for pome fruit, head lettuce, leaf lettuce, spinach, tomato,
and grape and tolerance-level residues for the remaining commodities.
The Agency also assumed 100 PCT. The chronic assessment also
incorporated DEEM default processing factors except for tomato paste/
tomato puree and lemon juice/lime juice, where a 1X empirical
processing factor was used to modify the tolerance values.
    iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that cyprodinil does not pose a cancer risk to humans.
Therefore, a dietary exposure assessment for the purpose of assessing
cancer risk is unnecessary.
    iv. Anticipated residue and PCT information. Section 408(b)(2)(E)
of FFDCA authorizes EPA to use available data and information on the
anticipated residue levels of pesticide residues in food and the actual
levels of pesticide residues that have been measured in food. If EPA
relies on such information, EPA must require pursuant to FFDCA section
408(f)(1) that data be provided 5 years after the tolerance is
established, modified, or left in effect, demonstrating that the levels
in food are not above the levels anticipated. For the present action,
EPA will issue such data call-ins as are required by FFDCA section
408(b)(2)(E) and authorized under FFDCA section 408(f)(1). Data will be
required to be submitted no later than 5 years from the date of
issuance of these tolerances.
    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The residues of concern in
drinking water for risk assessment purposes are cyprodinil and the
degradate CGA 249287. The estimated drinking water concentrations
(EDWCs) for each of these was calculated using a molecular weight
conversion and then combined for each modeled scenario. The Agency used
screening level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis
and risk assessment for cyprodinil and CGA 249287 in drinking water.
These simulation models take into account data on the physical,
chemical, and fate/transport characteristics of cyprodinil and CGA
249287. Further information regarding EPA drinking water models used in
pesticide exposure assessment can be found at http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
    Based on the Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling
System (PRZM/EXAMS), Screening Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-
GROW), and Pesticide Root Zone Model for Groundwater (PRZM-GW) models,
the EDWCs of cyprodinil and CGA 249287 for acute exposures are
estimated to be 34.8 parts per billion (ppb) for surface water and 2.05
ppb for ground water. EDWCs for chronic exposures for non-cancer
assessments are estimated to be 24.7 ppb for surface water and 1.80 ppb
for ground water.
    Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. The water concentration values
of 34.8 ppb and 24.7 ppb were used to assess the contribution to
drinking water for the acute and chronic dietary risk assessments,
respectively.
    3. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is
used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary
exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control,
termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets).
    Cyprodinil is currently registered for the following uses that
could result in residential exposures: Ornamental landscapes. EPA
assessed residential exposure using the following assumptions: Short-
term inhalation exposures to adult residential handlers from the
application of cyprodinil to ornamental landscapes. The residential
handler exposure scenarios were considered to be short-term only, due
to the infrequent use patterns associated with homeowner products.
Dermal exposures were not assessed since there was no dermal endpoint
identified for cyprodinil. Postapplication exposures to adults or
children were not expected and were not assessed. Further information
regarding EPA standard assumptions and generic inputs for residential
exposures may be found at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/science/residential-exposure-sop.html.
    4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
    EPA has not found cyprodinil to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and cyprodinil does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
cyprodinil does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other
substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which
chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.

D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

    1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the FQPA Safety
Factor (SF). In applying this provision, EPA either retains the default
value of 10X, or uses a different additional safety factor when
reliable data available to EPA support the choice of a different
factor.
    2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. In a rat developmental
toxicity study, there were significantly lower mean fetal weights in
the high dose group compared to controls as well as a significant
increase in skeletal anomalies in the high dose group due to abnormal
ossification. The skeletal anomalies or variations were considered to
be a transient developmental delay that occurred secondary to the
maternal toxicity noted in the high dose group. In the rabbit study,
the only treatment-related developmental effect was the indication of
an increased incidence of a 13th rib at maternally toxic doses. Signs
of fetal effects in the reproductive toxicity study included
significantly lower F1 and F2 pup weights in the high dose group during
lactation, which continued to be lower than controls post-weaning and
after the pre-mating period in the F1 generation. Reproductive effects
were seen only at doses that also caused parental toxicity.
    3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show the
safety of infants and children would be adequately protected if the
FQPA SF were reduced to 1X for non-inhalation exposure scenarios. For
inhalation exposure scenarios for all population groups, EPA is
retaining a 10X FQPA SF. That decision is based on the following
findings:
    i. The toxicity database for cyprodinil is complete, except for a
90-day inhalation toxicity study. In the absence of a route-specific
inhalation study, EPA is relying on the 28-day feeding/range-

finding rat oral study to estimate risk from inhalation exposures. EPA
has determined that the use of this study to extrapolate an inhalation
endpoint may understate risk. Accordingly, to address this uncertainty,
EPA has concluded that the 10X FQPA SF should be retained for risk
assessments involving inhalation exposure.
    ii. As to evidence of neurotoxicity, in an acute neurotoxicity
study in rats clinical signs, hypothermia, and changes in motor
activity were all found to be reversible and no longer seen at day 8
and 15 investigations. There were no treatment-related effects on
mortality or gross or histological neuropathology. Reduced motor
activity, induced hunched posture, piloerection and reduced
responsiveness to sensory stimuli were observed and disappeared in all
animals by day three to four. For the subchronic neurotoxicity study in
rats, there was no indication that cyprodinil is a neurotoxic chemical.
Based on this evidence, there is no need for a developmental
neurotoxicity study or additional UFs to account for neurotoxicity.
    iii. When toxicity was observed in the prenatal developmental
toxicity studies in rats and rabbits and the two-generation
reproduction study in rats, toxicity to the fetuses or offspring
occurred at the same doses at which effects were observed in maternal/
parental animals. Additionally, the skeletal anomalies or variations
were considered to be a transient developmental delay that occurred
secondary to the maternal toxicity noted in the high dose group.
Therefore, there is no evidence that cyprodinil results in increased
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal
developmental studies or in young rats in the two-generation
reproduction study.
    iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The acute dietary assessment was conservative and based upon
100 PCT and tolerance-level residues, as well as DEEM default and
empirical processing factors. The chronic dietary assessment was
partially refined with average field trial residues for some
commodities and tolerance-level residues for the remaining commodities.
DEEM default and empirical processing factors were also incorporated
into the chronic dietary assessment. EPA made conservative (protective)
assumptions in the ground and surface water modeling used to assess
exposure to cyprodinil in drinking water. Based on the discussion in
Unit III.C.3, postapplication exposure of children as well as
incidental oral exposure of toddlers is not expected. These assessments
will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by cyprodinil.

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

    EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide
exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the
acute PAD (aPAD) and chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer risks, EPA
calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term
risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate food, water,
and residential exposure to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an
adequate MOE exists.
    1. Acute risk. Using the exposure assumptions discussed in this
unit for acute exposure, the acute dietary exposure from food and water
to cyprodinil will occupy 8.6% of the aPAD for children one to two
years old, the population group receiving the greatest exposure.
    2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
cyprodinil from food and water will utilize 85% of the cPAD for
children one to two years old, the population group receiving the
greatest exposure. Based on the explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding
residential use patterns, chronic residential exposure to residues of
cyprodinil is not expected.
    3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into
account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level). Cyprodinil is
currently registered for uses that could result in short-term
residential exposure, and the Agency has determined that it is
appropriate to aggregate chronic exposure through food and water with
short-term residential exposures to cyprodinil.
    Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for short-
term exposures, EPA has concluded the combined short-term food, water,
and residential exposures result in an aggregate MOE of 7,900. Because
EPA's level of concern for cyprodinil is a MOE of 1,000 or below, these
MOEs are not of concern.
    4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure
level). An intermediate-term adverse effect was identified; however,
cyprodinil is not registered for any use patterns that would result in
intermediate-term residential exposure. Intermediate-term risk is
assessed based on intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
dietary exposure. Because there is no intermediate-term residential
exposure and chronic dietary exposure has already been assessed under
the appropriately protective cPAD (which is at least as protective as
the POD used to assess intermediate-term risk), no further assessment
of intermediate-term risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the chronic
dietary risk assessment for evaluating intermediate-term risk for
cyprodinil.
    5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity
studies, cyprodinil is not expected to pose a cancer risk to humans.
    6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to cyprodinil residues.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    Adequate high performance liquid chromatography, using ultra-violet
detection (HPLC/UV) methods (Methods AG-631 and AG-631B) are available
to enforce the tolerance expression of cyprodinil in/on plant
commodities.
    The methods may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry
Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD
20755-5350; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
B. International Residue Limits

    In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations
Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food
standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from
a Codex MRL; however,

FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain the reasons for
departing from the Codex level.
    The Codex has established MRLs for cyprodinil in or on stone fruit
at 2.0 ppm. This MRL is the same as the tolerance established for
cyprodinil in the United States for fruit, stone, group 12-12. The
Codex has not established a MRL for cyprodinil in or on the other
commodities associated with this action.

C. Response to Comments

    Several comments were received in response to the notice of filing.
All but one were concerned with potential environmental impacts, and
were not specifically related to the cyprodinil action. EPA notes that
these comments address potential environmental concerns; however, the
safety standard for approving tolerances under section 408 of the FFDCA
focuses on potential harms to human health and does not permit
consideration of effects on the environment.
    One additional comment was received that did not specifically
address the cyprodinil action, but that raised concerns about the
toxicity of pesticides and requested that no tolerance be established.
The Agency understands the commenter's concerns and recognizes that
some individuals believe that pesticides should be banned on
agricultural crops. However, the existing legal framework provided by
section 408 of the FFDCA states that tolerances may be set when persons
seeking such tolerances or exemptions have demonstrated that the
pesticide meets the safety standard imposed by that statute. This
citizen's comment appears to be directed at the underlying statute and
not EPA's implementation of it; the citizen has made no contention that
EPA has acted in violation of the statutory framework. EPA has found
that there is a reasonable certainty of no harm to humans after
considering the toxicological studies and the exposure levels of humans
to cyprodinil.

D. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances

    Based on the data submitted with the petition, EPA has determined
that the proposed tolerance in or on pomegranate at 7.0 ppm should be
established at 10 ppm. This tolerance level was determined by the
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development tolerance
calculation procedures. Additionally, the Agency is establishing a
tolerance in or on artichoke, globe, rather than the petitioned-for
commodity artichoke in order to provide the correct commodity
definition.

 V. Conclusion

    Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of cyprodinil,
4-cyclopropyl-6-methyl-N-phenyl-2-pyrimidinamine, in or on acerola at
1.5 ppm; artichoke, globe at 4.0 ppm; feijoa at 1.5 ppm; fruit, stone,
group 12-12 at 2.0 ppm; guava at 1.5 ppm; jaboticaba at 1.5 ppm;
passionfruit at 1.5 ppm; pomegranate at 10 ppm; starfruit at 1.5 ppm;
and wax jambu at 1.5 ppm. Additionally, this action removes the
tolerance established in or on fruit, stone, group 12 at 2.0 ppm as
that crop group tolerance is superseded by the tolerance being
established in this action for crop group 12-12.

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: August 13, 2015.
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.  180.532, remove the entry, ``Fruit, stone, group 12'' and
alphabetically add the following commodities to the table in paragraph
(a) to read as follows:

Sec.  180.532  Cyprodinil; tolerances for residues.

    (a) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Parts per
                          Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acerola.....................................................         1.5

                                * * * * *
Artichoke, globe............................................         4.0

                                * * * * *
Feijoa......................................................         1.5

                                * * * * *
Fruit, stone, group 12-12...................................         2.0

                                * * * * *
Guava.......................................................         1.5

                                * * * * *
Jaboticaba..................................................         1.5

                                * * * * *
Passionfruit................................................         1.5

                                * * * * *
Pomegranate.................................................          10

                                * * * * *
Starfruit...................................................         1.5

                                * * * * *
Wax jambu...................................................         1.5
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2015-22031 Filed 9-8-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 99 (Tuesday, May 23, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 32963-32966]
[FR Doc No: 2023-10442]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

17 CFR Part 249

[Release No. 34-97478]

Technical Amendments to Form BD and Form BDW

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission.

ACTION: Final rule; technical amendments.

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

SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') is
making technical amendments to Form BD and Form BDW, the uniform
broker-dealer registration form and the uniform request for withdrawal
from broker-dealer registration, respectively. The technical amendments
will update the current list of self-regulatory organizations
(``SROs'') and government jurisdictions listed on Form BD and Form BDW,
and make conforming changes to the definition of ``jurisdiction'' in
the forms.

DATES: Effective Date: May 23, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Emily Westerberg Russell, Chief
Counsel, Joanne Rutkowski, Assistant Chief Counsel, Denise Landers,
Senior Special Counsel, or Bonnie Gauch, Senior Special Counsel, at
(202) 551-5550, Office of the Chief Counsel, Division of Trading and
Markets, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE,
Washington, DC 20549.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Form BD requires an applicant, or
registrant, to indicate the SRO and governmental jurisdiction with
which it is registering or registered. For a ``partial withdrawal,''
\1\ Form BDW requires the applicant to specify the SRO and governmental
jurisdiction from which it is withdrawing.\2\ The Commission is making
technical amendments to Item 2 of Form BD and Item 3 of Form BDW to
update the list of governmental jurisdictions to include Guam, and to
update the list of SROs to reflect the registrations of new national
securities exchanges or the business combinations and resulting name
changes of existing SROs since the last update of Form BD and Form BDW.
More specifically, we are updating the list of SROs to reflect these
changes to: BOX Exchange LLC (BOX),\3\ Cboe Exchange, Inc. (CBOE),\4\
Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc. (Cboe BYX),\5\ Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (Cboe
BZX),\6\ Cboe C2 Exchange, Inc. (C2),\7\ Cboe EDGA Exchange, Inc. (Cboe
EDGA),\8\ Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. (Cboe EDGX),\9\ Investors Exchange
LLC (IEX),\10\ Long-Term Stock Exchange, Inc. (LTSE),\11\ Nasdaq BX,
Inc. (BX),\12\ Nasdaq GEMX, LLC (GEMX),\13\ Nasdaq

ISE, LLC (ISE),\14\ Nasdaq MRX, LLC (MRX),\15\ Nasdaq PHLX LLC
(PHLX),\16\ The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (NASDAQ),\17\ NYSE American LLC
(NYSE AMER),\18\ NYSE Chicago, Inc. (NYSE CHX),\19\ NYSE National, Inc.
(NYSE NAT),\20\ Miami International Securities Exchange, LLC
(MIAX),\21\ MIAX EMERALD, LLC (EMERALD),\22\ MIAX PEARL, LLC
(PEARL),\23\ and MEMX LLC (MEMX).\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ A ``full withdrawal'' terminates registration with the
Commission, all SROs, and all jurisdictions. However, a ``partial
withdrawal'' terminates registration with specific jurisdictions and
SROs, but does not terminate registration with the Commission and at
least one SRO and jurisdiction.
    \2\ Section 15(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Exchange Act'') provides that broker-dealers can register and
withdraw from registration under procedures developed by the
Commission. Exchange Act Rule 15b1-1 requires that an application
for registration of a broker or dealer that is filed pursuant to
Section 15(b) of the Exchange Act be filed on Form BD in accordance
with the instructions on the form. Exchange Act Rule 15b6-1 requires
that a notice of withdrawal from registration as a broker or dealer
filed pursuant to Section 15(b) of the Exchange Act be filed on Form
BDW in accordance with the instructions on the form. See 15 U.S.C.
78o; 17 CFR 240.15b1-1 and 15b6-1. See also, Form BD and Form BDW 17
CFR 249.501 and 501a.
    \3\ Exchange Act Release No. 83941 (Aug. 24, 2018), 83 FR 44320
(Aug. 30, 2018) (concerning name change from BOX Options Exchange
LLC to BOX Exchange LLC); Exchange Act Release No. 66871 (Apr. 27,
2012), 77 FR 26323 (May 3, 2012) (approving BOX Options Exchange LLC
application for registration as a national securities exchange).
    \4\ Exchange Act Release No. 81981 (Oct. 30, 2017), 82 FR 51309
(Nov. 3, 2017) (concerning name change from Chicago Board Options
Exchange, Incorporated to Cboe Exchange, Inc.).
    \5\ Exchange Act Release No. 81952 (Oct. 26, 2017), 82 FR 50725
(Nov. 1, 2017) (concerning name change from Bats BYX Exchange, Inc.
to Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc.); Exchange Act Release No. 79585 (Dec.
16, 2016), 81 FR 93988 (Dec. 22, 2016) (approving proposed rule
change in connection with a corporate transaction involving Bats
Global Markets, Inc. and CBOE Holdings, Inc.); Exchange Act Release
No. 77308 (Mar. 7, 2016), 81 FR 12975 (Mar. 11, 2016) (concerning
name change from BATS Y-Exchange, Inc. to Bats BYX Exchange, Inc.);
Exchange Act Release No. 62716 (Aug. 13, 2010), 75 FR 51295 (Aug.
19, 2010) (approving BATS Y-Exchange, Inc. application for
registration as a national securities exchange).
    \6\ Exchange Act Release No. 81962 (Oct. 26, 2017), 82 FR 50711
(Nov. 1, 2017) (concerning name change from Bats BZX Exchange, Inc.
to Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc.); Exchange Act Release No. 79585 (Dec.
16, 2016), 81 FR 93988 (Dec. 22, 2016) (approving proposed rule
change in connection with a corporate transaction involving Bats
Global Markets, Inc. and CBOE Holdings, Inc.); Exchange Act Release
No. 77307 (Mar. 7, 2016), 81 FR 12996 (Mar. 11, 2016) (concerning
name change from BATS Exchange, Inc. to Bats BZX Exchange, Inc.);
Exchange Act Release No. 58375 (Aug. 18, 2008), 73 FR 49498 (Aug.
21, 2008) (approving BATS Exchange, Inc. application for
registration as a national securities exchange).
    \7\ Exchange Act Release No. 81979 (Oct. 30, 2017), 82 FR 51317
(Nov. 3, 2017) (concerning name change from C2 Options Exchange,
Incorporated to Cboe C2 Exchange, Inc.); Exchange Act Release No.
61152 (Dec. 10, 2009), 74 FR 66699 (Dec. 16, 2009) (approving C2
Options Exchange, Incorporated application for registration as a
national securities exchange).
    \8\ Exchange Act Release No. 81957 (Oct. 26, 2017), 82 FR 50716
(Nov. 1, 2017) (concerning name change from Bats EDGA Exchange, Inc.
to Cboe EDGA Exchange, Inc.); Exchange Act Release No. 79585 (Dec.
16, 2016), 81 FR 93988 (Dec. 22, 2016) (approving proposed rule
change in connection with a corporate transaction involving Bats
Global Markets, Inc. and CBOE Holdings, Inc.); Exchange Act Release
No. 77299 (Mar. 4, 2016), 81 FR 12759 (Mar. 10, 2016) (concerning
name change from EDGA Exchange, Inc. to Bats EDGA Exchange, Inc.);
Exchange Act Release No. 61698 (Mar. 12, 2010), 75 FR 13151 (Mar.
18, 2010) (approving EDGX Exchange, Inc. and EDGA Exchange, Inc.
applications for registration as national securities exchanges).
    \9\ Exchange Act Release No. 81963 (Oct. 26, 2017), 82 FR 50697
(Nov. 1, 2017) (concerning name change from Bats EDGX Exchange, Inc.
to Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc.); Exchange Act Release No. 79585 (Dec.
16, 2016), 81 FR 93988 (Dec. 22, 2016) (approving proposed rule
change in connection with a corporate transaction involving Bats
Global Markets, Inc. and CBOE Holdings, Inc.); Exchange Act Release
No. 77298 (Mar. 4, 2016), 81 FR 12757 (Mar. 10, 2016) (concerning
name change from EDGX Exchange, Inc. to Bats EDGX Exchange, Inc.);
Exchange Act Release No. 61698 (Mar. 12, 2010), 75 FR 13151 (Mar.
18, 2010) (approving EDGX Exchange, Inc. and EDGA Exchange, Inc.
applications for registration as national securities exchanges).
    \10\ Exchange Act Release No. 78101 (June 17, 2016), 81 FR 41141
(June 23, 2016) (approving Investors Exchange LLC registration as a
national securities exchange).
    \11\ Exchange Act Release No. 85828 (May 10, 2019), 84 FR 21841
(May 15, 2019) (approving Long-Term Stock Exchange, Inc.
registration as a national securities exchange).
    \12\ Exchange Act Release No. 81948 (Oct. 25, 2017), 82 FR 50468
(Oct. 31, 2017) (concerning name change from NASDAQ BX, Inc. to
Nasdaq BX, Inc.); Exchange Act Release No. 76656 (Dec. 15, 2015), 80
FR 79381 (Dec. 21, 2015) (concerning name change from NASDAQ OMX BX,
Inc. to NASDAQ BX, Inc.); Exchange Act Release No. 60358 (July 21,
2009), 74 FR 37277 (July 28, 2009) (concerning name change from the
Boston Stock Exchange, Inc. to NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc.); Exchange Act
Release No. 58324 (Aug. 7, 2008), 73 FR 46936 (Aug. 12, 2008)
(approving proposed rule change in connection with the acquisition
of the Boston Stock Exchange, Inc. by The NASDAQ OMX Group, Inc.).
    \13\ Exchange Act Release No. 80248 (Mar. 15, 2017), 82 FR 14547
(Mar. 21, 2017) (concerning name change from ISE Gemini, LLC to
Nasdaq GEMX, LLC); Exchange Act Release No. 71586 (Feb. 20, 2014),
79 FR 10861 (Feb. 26, 2014) (concerning name change from Topaz
Exchange, LLC to ISE Gemini, LLC); Exchange Act Release No. 70050
(July 26, 2013), 78 FR 46622 (Aug. 1, 2013) (approving Topaz
Exchange, LLC application for registration as a national securities
exchange).
    \14\ Exchange Act Release No. 80325 (Mar. 29, 2017), 82 FR 16445
(Apr. 4, 2017) (concerning name change from International Securities
Exchange, LLC to Nasdaq ISE, LLC).
    \15\ Exchange Act Release No. 80326 (Mar. 29, 2017), 82 FR 16460
(Apr. 4, 2017) (concerning name change from ISE Mercury, LLC to
Nasdaq MRX, LLC); Exchange Act Release No. 76998 (Jan. 29, 2016), 81
FR 6066 (Feb. 4, 2016) (approving ISE Mercury, LLC application for
registration as a national securities exchange).
    \16\ Exchange Act Release No. 81938 (Oct. 24, 2017), 82 FR 50185
(Oct. 30, 2017) (concerning name change from NASDAQ PHLX LLC to
Nasdaq PHLX LLC); Exchange Act Release No. 76654 (Dec. 15, 2015), 80
FR 79396 (Dec. 21, 2015) (concerning name change from NASDAQ OMX
PHLX LLC to NASDAQ PHLX LLC); Exchange Act Release No. 62783 (Aug.
27, 2010), 75 FR 54204 (Sept. 3, 2010) (concerning the conversion of
NASDAQ OMX PHLX, Inc. to a limited liability company); Exchange Act
Release No. 58380 (Aug. 18, 2008), 73 FR 49728 (Aug. 22, 2008)
(concerning name change from the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc.
to NASDAQ OMX PHLX, Inc.); Exchange Act Release No. 58179 (July 17,
2008), 73 FR 42874 (July 23, 2008) (approving proposed rule change
in connection with the acquisition of the Philadelphia Stock
Exchange, Inc. by The NASDAQ OMX Group, Inc.).
    \17\ Exchange Act Release No. 81917 (Oct. 23, 2017), 82 FR 49879
(Oct. 27, 2017) (concerning name change from The NASDAQ Stock Market
LLC to The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC).
    \18\ Exchange Act Release No. 80283 (Mar. 21, 2017), 82 FR 15244
(Mar. 27, 2017) (concerning name change from NYSE MKT LLC to NYSE
American LLC); Exchange Act Release No. 67037 (May 21, 2012), 77 FR
31415 (May 25, 2012) (concerning name change from NYSE Amex LLC to
NYSE MKT LLC); Exchange Act Release No. 59575 (Mar. 13, 2009), 74 FR
11803 (Mar. 19, 2009) (concerning name change from NYSE Alternext US
LLC to NYSE Amex LLC); Exchange Act Release No. 58673 (Sept. 29,
2008), 73 FR 57707 (Oct. 3, 2008) (approving proposed rule change in
connection with the acquisition of American Stock Exchange LLC by
NYSE Euronext and renaming as NYSE Alternext US LLC).
    \19\ Exchange Act Release No. 84494 (Oct. 26, 2018), 83 FR 54953
(Nov. 1, 2018) (concerning name change from the Chicago Stock
Exchange, Inc. to NYSE Chicago, Inc.); Exchange Act Release No.
83635 (July 13, 2018), 83 FR 34182 (July 19, 2018) (approving
proposed rule change in connection with the indirect acquisition of
the Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc. by NYSE Group, Inc.).
    \20\ Exchange Act Release No. 79902 (Jan. 30, 2017), 82 FR 9258
(Feb. 3, 2017) (approving proposed rule change in connection with
National Stock Exchange, Inc.'s acquisition by NYSE Group, Inc. and
renaming as NYSE National, Inc.).
    \21\ Exchange Act Release No. Release No. 68341 (Dec. 3, 2012),
77 FR 73065 (Dec. 7, 2012) (approving Miami International Securities
Exchange, LLC application for registration as a national securities
exchange).
    \22\ Exchange Act Release No. 84891 (Dec. 20, 2018), 83 FR 67421
(Dec. 28, 2018) (approving MIAX EMERALD, LLC application for
registration as a national securities exchange).
    \23\ Exchange Act Release No. 79543 (Dec. 13, 2016), 81 FR 92901
(Dec. 20, 2016); (approving MIAX PEARL, LLC application for
registration as a national securities exchange).
    \24\ Exchange Act Release No. 88806 (May 4, 2020), 85 FR 27451
(May 8, 2020) (approving MEMX LLC application for registration as a
national securities exchange).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, we are making conforming changes to the definition of
``jurisdiction'' to include Guam, a United States territory.
``Jurisdiction'' will be defined as: ``A state, the District of
Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands,
Guam, or any subdivision or regulatory body thereof.''

List of Subjects in 17 CFR Part 249

    Broker-dealers, reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Securities.

Statutory Authority

    We are adopting the technical amendments to Forms BD and BDW under
the authority set forth in the Exchange Act and, in particular,
Sections 15(a), 15(b), 17(a), and 23(a) therein.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 15 U.S.C. 78o(a), 78o(b), 78q(a), and 78w(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Text of Amendments

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, 17 CFR part 249 is amended
as follows:

PART 249--FORMS, SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

0
1. The general authority citation for part 249 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 78a et seq. and 7201 et seq.; 12 U.S.C.
5461 et seq.; 18 U.S.C. 1350; Sec. 953(b) Pub. L. 111-203, 124 Stat.
1904; Sec. 102(a)(3) Pub. L. 112-106, 126 Stat. 309 (2012), Sec. 107
Pub. L. 112-106, 126 Stat. 313 (2012), Sec. 72001 Pub. L. 114-94,
129 Stat. 1312 (2015), and secs. 2 and 3 Pub. L. 116-222, 134 Stat.
1063 (2020), unless otherwise noted.
* * * * *

0
2. Form BD (referenced in Sec.  249.501) is amended by:
0
a. In the Explanation of Terms, 1. General section, removing the words
``JURISDICTION--A state, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of
Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, or any subdivision or regulatory
body thereof.'' and add, in their place, the words ``JURISDICTION--A
state, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the
U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, or any subdivision or regulatory body
thereof.''; and
0
b. In Item 2, revising the SRO and Jurisdiction tables.
    The revisions read as follows:

    Note: The text of Form BD does not, and the amendments will not,
appear in the Code of Federal Regulations.

Form BD

* * * * *
    2. * * *

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR23MY23.019

* * * * *

0
3. Form BDW (referenced in Sec.  249.501a) is amended by:
0
a. In the Explanation of Terms section, removing the words ``The term
JURISDICTION means a state, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth
of Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, or any subdivision or
regulatory body thereof.'' and adding, in their place, the words ``The
term JURISDICTION means a state, the District of Columbia, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, or any
subdivision or regulatory body thereof.''; and
0
b. In Item 3, revising the SRO and Jurisdiction tables.
    The revisions read as follows:

    Note: The text of Form BDW does not, and the amendments will
not, appear in the Code of Federal Regulations.

Form BDW

* * * * *
    3. * * *

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR23MY23.020

* * * * *

    Dated: May 11, 2023.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-10442 Filed 5-22-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 205 (Tuesday, October 23, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 53368-53371]
[FR Doc No: 2018-22750]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2018-0513; Product Identifier 2018-CE-013-AD; Amendment
39-19471; AD 2018-21-13]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Honda Aircraft Company LLC

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2018-11-05 for
certain Honda Aircraft Company LLC (Honda) Model HA-420 airplanes. AD
2018-11-05 required incorporating a temporary revision into the
airplane flight manual (AFM) and replacing the faulty power brake valve
(PBV) upon condition. We issued AD 2018-11-05 as a short-term action to
address the immediate need to detect and replace a faulty PBV. This AD
retains the actions required in AD 2018-11-05 and requires replacing
the faulty PBV with the improved part. We are issuing this AD to
address the long-term corrective action and address the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective November 27, 2018.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of May 29, 2018
(83 FR 24016, May 24, 2018).
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain other publications listed in

this AD as of April 13, 2018 (83 FR 13401, March 29, 2018).

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Honda Aircraft Company LLC, 6430 Ballinger Road, Greensboro,
North Carolina 27410; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; internet: http://www.hondajet.com. You may view this service information at the FAA,
Policy and Innovation Division, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri
64106. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-
0513.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-
0513; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this final rule, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for Docket Operations (phone: 800-647-
5527) is U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30,
West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Samuel Kovitch, Aerospace Engineer,
Atlanta ACO Branch, FAA, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, Georgia
30337; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to remove AD 2018-11-05, Amendment 39-19293 (83 FR 24016, May
24, 2018) (``AD 2018-11-05''), and add a new AD to correct an unsafe
condition on certain Honda Model HA-420 airplanes. We issued AD 2018-
11-05 as a short-term immediate action to detect a faulty PBV. AD 2018-
11-05 required inserting a temporary revision into the AFM and
replacing the installed PBV, part number (P/N) HJ1-13243-101-005 or P/N
HJ1-13243-101-007, with an improved PBV, P/N HJ1-13243-101-009, if any
of the procedures listed in the AFM temporary revision revealed a
leaking PBV. In addition, AD 2018-11-05 allowed replacing the installed
P/N HJ1-13243-101-005 or P/N HJ1-13243-101-007 with the improved P/N
HJ1-13243-101-009 as an optional terminating action for the temporary
revision procedures in the AFM. AD 2018-11-05 resulted from reports of
unannunciated asymmetric braking during ground operations and landing
deceleration.
    The NPRM published in the Federal Register on June 7, 2018 (83 FR
26381). The NPRM was issued as follow-on rulemaking to propose the
long-term actions necessary to address the faulty PBV. The NPRM
proposed to retain the requirements of AD 2018-11-05 and require
replacing the installed PBV, P/N HJ1-13243-101-005 or P/N HJ1-13243-
101-007, with the improved PBV, P/N HJ1-13243-101-009, within 12
months. We are issuing this AD to address the long-term corrective
action.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We received no comments on the NPRM or on the determination of
the cost to the public.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety and
the public interest require adopting this AD as proposed except for
minor editorial changes. We also removed the optional terminating
action provision, which allowed operators to replace the PBV at any
time to terminate the pre-flight checks in the AFM, because that
provision was unnecessary. The requirement to replace the PBV within 12
months of the effective date of this AD provides operators with that
same option. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for addressing the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Honda AFM Temporary Revision TR 01.1, dated February
16, 2018 (temporary revision), Honda Service Bulletin SB-420-32-001,
dated January 8, 2018 (SB-420-32-001), and Honda Service Bulletin SB-
420-32-001, Revision B, dated April 16, 2018 (SB-420-32-001, Revision
B). The temporary revision contains procedures for pilot checks of the
braking system before every flight during ground operations and before
every landing, procedures for landing with a leaking PBV, and
procedures for rechecking the PBV for leaking after landing. The
temporary revision also includes instructions for corrective actions if
any indication of a leaking PBV is found after landing. SB-420-32-001
and SB-420-32-001, Revision B both contain procedures for replacing a
faulty PBV with an improved PBV. This service information is reasonably
available because the interested parties have access to it through
their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
ADDRESSES section.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the Service Information

    SB-420-32-001 and SB-420-32-001, Revision B specify submitting
certain information to the manufacturer. This AD does not require that
action.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 72 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
             Action                  Labor cost               Parts cost              product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Insert temporary revision into   1 work-hour x $85   Not applicable.............             $85          $6,120
 the AFM.                         per hour = $85.
Replace the power brake valve    20 work-hours x     $21,878....................          23,578       1,697,616
 (PBV).                           $85 per hour =
                                  $1,700.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We provided the cost of replacing the PBV as an on-condition cost
based on the procedures in the temporary revision and as an optional
terminating action in AD 2018-11-05. We have no way of determining how
many owner/operators of the affected airplanes may have already done
this replacement. Therefore, we have included a total cost for all
affected airplanes.
    The difference in the Cost of Compliance between AD 2018-11-05

and this AD is the requirement to replace the power brake valve.

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.
    This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the
Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by
FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is
normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but
during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the
authority to issue ADs applicable to small airplanes, gliders,
balloons, airships, domestic business jet transport airplanes, and
associated appliances to the Director of the Policy and Innovation
Division.

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2018-11-05, Amendment 39-19293 (83 FR 24016, May 24, 2018), and adding
the following new AD:

2018-21-13 Honda Aircraft Company LLC: Amendment 39-19471; Docket
No. FAA-2018-0513; Product Identifier 2018-CE-013-AD.

 (a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective November 27, 2018.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2018-11-05, Amendment 39-19293 (83 FR 24016,
May 24, 2018) (``AD 2018-11-05'').

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Honda Aircraft Company LLC (Honda) Model HA-
420 airplanes, all serial numbers, that:
    (1) Have power brake valve (PBV), part number (P/N) HJ1-13243-
101-005 or HJ1-13243-101-007, installed; and
    (2) are certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association
(ATA) of America Code 32, Landing Gear.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of unannunciated asymmetric
braking during ground operations and landing deceleration. We are
issuing this AD to detect failure of the PBV. The unsafe condition,
if not addressed, could result in degraded braking performance and
reduced directional control during ground operations and landing
deceleration.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Insert Temporary Revision Into the Airplane Flight Manual (AFM)

    Before further flight after May 29, 2018 (the effective date
retained from AD 2018-11-05) insert Honda Temporary Revision TR
01.1, dated February 16, 2018 (temporary revision), into the Honda
HA-420 Airplane Flight Manual (AFM). The procedures listed in the
temporary revision are required while operating with PBV P/N HJ1-
13243-101-005 or P/N HJ1-13243-101-007 installed. This insertion and
the steps therein may be performed by the owner/operator (pilot)
holding at least a private pilot certificate and must be entered
into the airplane records showing compliance with this AD in
accordance with 14 CFR 43.9 (a)(1) through (4) and 14 CFR
91.417(a)(2)(v). The record must be maintained as required by 14 CFR
91.417, 121.380, or 135.439.

(h) Replace the Power Brake Valve

    As of and at any time after May 29, 2018 (the effective date
retained from AD 2018-11-05), if any of the procedures listed in the
temporary revision referenced in paragraph (g) of this AD reveal a
leaking PBV, before further flight, replace the installed PBV, P/N
HJ1-13243-101-005 or P/N HJ1-13243-101-007, with the improved PBV,
P/N HJ1-13243-101-009. The replacement must be done using the
Accomplishment Instructions in either Honda Service Bulletin SB-420-
32-001, dated January 8, 2018 (SB-420-32-001), or Honda Service
Bulletin SB-420-32-001, Revision B, dated April 16, 2018 (SB-420-32-
001, Revision B). Before further flight after installing P/N HJ1-
13243-101-009, remove the temporary revision from the Honda HA-420
AFM.

(i) No Reporting Requirement

    Although SB-420-32-001 and SB-420-32-001, Revision B specify
submitting certain information to the manufacturer, this AD does not
require that action.

(j) Mandatory Replacement

    Within the next 12 months after November 27, 2018 (the effective
date of this AD), if not previously done as a result of paragraph
(h) of this AD, replace the installed PBV, P/N HJ1-13243-101-005 or
P/N HJ1-13243-101-007, with the improved PBV, P/N HJ1-13243-101-009.
The replacement must be done using the Accomplishment Instructions
in either SB-420-32-001 or SB-420-32-001, Revision B. Before further
flight after installing P/N HJ1-13243-101-009, remove the temporary
revision from the Honda HA-420 AFM.

(k) Special Flight Permit

    Special flight permits for the AFM Limitations portion of this
AD are prohibited. Special flight permits for the PBV replacement
required in this AD are permitted with the following limitations:
One ferry flight, including fuel stops, to a service center with the
temporary revision incorporated into the Honda HA-420 AFM.

(l) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Atlanta ACO 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 certification office, send it to the attention of the
person identified in paragraph (m) of this AD.

    (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.
    (3) For service information that contains steps that are labeled
as Required for Compliance (RC), the provisions of paragraphs
(l)(3)(i) and (ii) of this AD apply.
    (i) The steps labeled as RC, including substeps under an RC step
and any figures identified in an RC step, must be done to comply
with the AD. An AMOC is required for any deviations to RC steps,
including substeps and identified figures.
    (ii) Steps not labeled as RC may be deviated from using accepted
methods in accordance with the operator's maintenance or inspection
program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the RC
steps, including substeps and identified figures, can still be done
as specified, and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy
condition.

(m) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Samuel Kovitch,
Aerospace Engineer, Atlanta ACO Branch, FAA, 1701 Columbia Avenue,
College Park, Georgia 30337; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: (404) 474-
5605; email: [email protected].

(n) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (3) The following service information was approved for IBR on
April 13, 2018 (83 FR 13401, March 29, 2018).
    (i) Honda Aircraft Company Temporary Revision TR 01.1, dated
February 16, 2018.
    (ii) Honda Aircraft Company Service Bulletin SB-420-32-001,
dated January 8, 2018.
    (4) The following service information was approved for IBR on
May 29, 2018 (83 FR 24016, May 24, 2018).
    (i) Honda Aircraft Company Service Bulletin SB-420-32-001,
Revision B, dated April 16, 2018.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (5) For Honda Aircraft Company LLC service information
identified in this AD, contact Honda Aircraft Company LLC, 6430
Ballinger Road, Greensboro, North Carolina 27410; telephone (336)
662-0246; internet: http://www.hondajet.com.
    (6) You may view this service information at FAA, Policy and
Innovation Division, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
816-329-4148. In addition, you can access this service information
on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0513.
    (7) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on October 10, 2018.
Melvin J. Johnson,
Aircraft Certification Service, Deputy Director, Policy & Innovation
Division.
[FR Doc. 2018-22750 Filed 10-22-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: June 14, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 114)]
[Notices]
[Page 32839-32840]
[DOCID:fr14jn07-32]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP96-200-175]

CenterPoint Energy Gas Transmission Company ; Notice of
Negotiated Rate Filing

June 4, 2007.
    Take notice that on May 30, 2007, CenterPoint Energy Gas
Transmission Company (CEGT) tendered for filing and approval an
amendment to a negotiated rate agreement between CEGT and Anadarko
Energy Services Company. The amended agreement will be effective June
1, 2007.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest this filing must file
in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of
Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210).
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 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.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' line 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>.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-11453 Filed 6-13-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P