[Federal Register: September 23, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 183)]
[Notices]
[Page 48624-48627]
[DOCID:fr23se09-131]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2009-0160]

Public Hearing To Determine Whether Transportation Collaborative,
Inc. (TCI) Has Met Notification and Remedy Requirements

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of public hearing.

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

SUMMARY: NHTSA will hold a public hearing to gather information on
whether Transportation Collaborative, Inc. of Warwick, New York,
(``TCI'') has reasonably met its obligations under the National Traffic
and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, as amended, to notify owners, purchasers,
and dealers and/or remedy failures to comply with federal motor-vehicle
safety standards (FMVSS) or defects related to motor vehicle safety in
fifteen (15) recalls involving vehicles built by U.S. Bus, Inc. of
Suffern, New York (``U.S. Bus''). The proceeding may result in the
issuance of an order directing TCI to provide proper notification and/
or an effective remedy in one or more of the recalls.

DATES: The public hearing will be held beginning at 10 a.m. on Friday,
October 23, 2009 in Room 4 of the D.O.T. Conference Center, located at
1200 New Jersey Ave., SE., Washington, DC 20590. NHTSA recommends that
all persons attending the hearing arrive at least 45 minutes early in
order to facilitate entry into the Conference Center. If you wish to
attend or speak at the hearing, you must register in advance no later
than Tuesday, October 20, 2009, by following the instructions in the
PROCEDURAL MATTERS section of this notice. NHTSA will consider late
registrants to the extent time and space allows, but NHTSA cannot
ensure that late registrants will be able to attend or speak at the
hearing. To ensure that NHTSA has an opportunity to consider comments,
NHTSA must receive written comments by Tuesday, October 20, 2009.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments to the docket number identified in
the heading of this document by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, M-30, U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building, Ground Floor, Rm. W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., between 9 am and 5 pm Eastern
Time, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Regardless of how you submit your comments, you should mention the
docket number of this document.
    You may call the Docket at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Note that all comments received will be posted without change to
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Zachary Dunlap, Office of Chief
Counsel, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590;<PHONE_NUMBER>. Information
related to the recalls is available through NHTSA's Web site: http://
www.safercar.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(e), 30120(e),
and 49 CFR 557.7, NHTSA's Administrator has decided that it is
necessary to schedule a public hearing to determine whether TCI
reasonably met notification and remedy requirements for noncompliant
and defective vehicles manufactured by U.S. Bus. TCI purchased U.S.
Bus' assets in an asset sale on or about November 1, 2007. Prior to
this sale, U.S. Bus filed at least fifteen (15) reports with NHTSA that
vehicles it manufactured failed to comply with applicable FMVSS or
contained safety defects. Since the date of the asset sale, neither
U.S. Bus nor TCI have taken any actions to remedy the defects and
noncompliances. According to current and former U.S. Bus officials,
U.S. Bus ceased operations on or about October 31, 2007 and no longer
manufactures buses. TCI and U.S. Bus have continuity of ownership,
management, personnel, assets, and general business operations. Based
on available information, the shareholders of both U.S. Bus and TCI--
Debra Bess Deutsch-Corr, Steven Marksohn, Jerome B. Marksohn, Bart
Marksohn, and Helena Marksohn--are the same.
    A. Requirements Applicable to Recalls:
    If a manufacturer of a motor vehicle learns that a vehicle contains
a defect and determines that the defect relates to motor-vehicle
safety, or determines that the vehicle does not comply with an
applicable motor vehicle safety standard, the manufacturer shall notify
the Secretary of Transportation and the owners, purchasers, and dealers
of the vehicle. 49 U.S.C. 30118(c). Notification shall be given within
a reasonable time after the manufacturer first decides that a safety-
related defect or non-compliance exists.

49 U.S.C. 30120(c)(2). After filing a notification with the Secretary
that a vehicle contains a defect or does not comply with an applicable
motor vehicle safety standard, the manufacturer shall file a copy of
the manufacturer's remedy program. 49 U.S.C. 30120(d). The manufacturer
is required to file quarterly reports that include information about
the implementation of the remedy plan. 49 U.S.C. 30120(d). The
Secretary's authority has been delegated to NHTSA. 49 CFR 1.50(a).

1. Defect and Noncompliance Information Report

    49 CFR 573.6 specifies the information the manufacturer must
include in its Defect and Noncompliance Information Report, commonly
referred to as a Part 573 report, which notifies NHTSA of the existence
of a noncompliance with a FMVSS or a defect that relates to motor
vehicle safety. The manufacturer is required to report the estimated
date on which it will begin sending notifications to owners and to
dealers that there is a noncompliance or safety-related defect and that
a remedy without charge will be available to owners, and the estimated
date(s) on which it will complete such notifications. The manufacturer
is to describe its program for remedying the defect or non-compliance.
If a manufacturer subsequently becomes aware that either the beginning
or the completion dates reported to the agency for any of the
notifications will be delayed by more than two weeks, it shall promptly
advise the agency of the delay and the reasons therefor, and furnish a
revised estimate.

2. Notification

    Under 49 CFR 577.5, the manufacturer of motor vehicles is required
to provide notice to owners and dealers when it determines that any
motor vehicle contains a noncompliance with a FMVSS or a defect that
relates to motor vehicle safety. The proposed owner notification letter
must be submitted to NHTSA's Recall Management Division no fewer then
five Federal Government business days before the manufacturer intends
to begin mailing it to owners.
    This section also states the substantive requirements for the body
of the notice. In summary, it must include a statement of measures to
be taken to remedy the problem, without charge. Also to be included is
the earliest date on which the defect or noncompliance will be remedied
without charge. In the case of remedy by repair, this date shall be the
earliest date on which the manufacturer reasonably expects that dealers
or other service facilities will receive necessary parts and
instructions.

3. Time and Manner of Notification

    49 CFR 577.7 requires the manufacturer to furnish the notification
required by 49 CFR 577.5 to owners and dealers within a reasonable time
after the manufacturer first decides that a noncompliance or defect
that relates to motor vehicle safety exists.

4. Quarterly Reports

    49 CFR 573.7 requires that each manufacturer who is conducting a
noncompliance or defect notification campaign to submit on a quarterly
basis, a report to NHTSA containing certain information. Included in
this report is NHTSA's notification campaign number, the date
notification began and was completed, and the number of vehicles or
items of equipment involved in the notification campaign. The
manufacturer must provide the number of vehicles and equipment items
which have been inspected and repaired, the number of vehicles and
equipment items inspected and determined not to need repair, and the
number of vehicles or items of equipment determined to be unreachable
for inspection for any reason. Finally, the number of vehicles or items
or equipment in each category shall be specified.
    This information must be included in a quarterly report with
respect to each notification campaign, for each of six consecutive
quarters beginning with the quarter in which the campaign was initiated
(i.e., the date of initial mailing of the defect or noncompliance
notification to owners) or corrective action has been completed on all
defective or non-complying vehicles or items of replacement equipment
involved in the campaign, whichever occurs first.

5. Requirement To Provide a Free Remedy

    After notice is given, a manufacturer ``shall remedy the defect or
noncompliance without charge when the vehicle or equipment is presented
for remedy.'' 49 U.S.C. 30120(a)(1). A manufacturer can remedy one of
three ways: by repairing the vehicle; by replacing the vehicle with an
identical or reasonably equivalent vehicle; or, by refunding the
purchase price, less a reasonable allowance for depreciation. 49 U.S.C.
30120(a)(1)(A).

6. Public Hearing

    As provided by 49 U.S.C. 30118(e), 30120(e), and 49 CFR 557.7,
NHTSA's Administrator can conduct a hearing to decide whether a
manufacturer has reasonably met its notification requirements or remedy
requirements. If the Administrator determines that the manufacturer has
not reasonably met his obligation to notify owners, purchasers, and
dealers of a safety-related defect or failure to comply with a FMVSS or
to remedy such defect or failure to comply, he can order the
manufacturer to take specified action to comply with the manufacturer's
obligation. In addition, the Administrator may take any action
authorized by the Act. 49 U.S.C. 30118(e), 30120(e), and 49 CFR 557.8.

A. U.S. Bus and TCI

    U.S. Bus is a New York corporation that formerly manufactured
buses. From 2001 to 2007, U.S. Bus filed twenty-one (21) defect and
noncompliance information reports (``Part 573 Report'') with NHTSA
pursuant to 49 CFR 573.6. A number of the recall campaigns initiated by
U.S. Bus have not been completed. In some, owners, purchasers, and
dealers have not been provided notice. In a larger number of recalls,
many buses have not been repaired. By mid 2007, U.S. Bus had committed
to completing a number of recall and remedy campaigns that would
require substantial repairs. Around November 1, 2007, U.S. Bus notified
the Agency that it sold its assets to another corporation, TCI. TCI is
a New York corporation that manufactures buses, and does business under
the name, TransTech Bus or Trans-Tech Bus. The asset sale between TCI
and U.S. Bus occurred on or about November 1, 2007. After the sale,
NHTSA served Special Orders requesting information about the
outstanding recalls, the asset sale and the ownership, activities, and
management of both companies from TCI, U.S. Bus, and their management.
After reviewing this information, NHTSA has tentatively concluded that
TCI, as the successor of U.S. Bus, is legally responsible for
completing the notification or remedy campaigns for the outstanding
U.S. Bus recalls.

B. Affected Recalls

    Fifteen (15) noncompliance or defect recalls initiated by U.S. Bus
remain incomplete. A list of the incomplete recalls is listed below.
     NHTSA Recalls No. 01V-234 and 01V-235: Recall of 474
vehicles whose seat back impact barriers failed to meet the strength
requirements of FMVSS No. 222, school bus passenger seating and crash
protection, increasing the risk of occupant injury in a crash. U.S. Bus
reported that all owners had been

notified and 216 vehicles had been repaired.
     NHTSA Recall No. 01V-281: Recall of 188 Model Year
(``MY'') 1998 through 2001 Sturdibus vehicles that failed to comply
with the body joint strength requirements of FMVSS No. 221, school bus
body joint strength, increasing the risk that the vehicle body panels
might separate in a crash. As of U.S. Bus' last official filing with
NHTSA in October 2007, U.S. Bus reported that all owners had been
notified but none of the vehicles had been remedied. In a subsequent
response from U.S. Bus, listed as being updated on November 19, 2007,
U.S. Bus reported that there were 171 affected vehicles, 165 of which
had been notified, and 74 had been inspected and remedied. U.S. Bus
also stated that ``[t]his recall is superceeded [sic] by Recall Number:
05V-375 Body Joint Strength,'' which is inaccurate.
     NHTSA Recall No. 05V-255: Recall of 172 MY 2004 and 2005
model year Sturdibus and Universe vehicles whose seat back impact
barriers failed to meet the strength requirements of FMVSS No. 222,
school bus passenger seating and crash protection, increasing the risk
of occupant injury in a crash. As of August 2007, U.S. Bus reported
that it had notified all owners of these vehicles but had not performed
any repairs to remedy the condition cited in the recall. In a
subsequent response from U.S. Bus, listed as being updated on November
19, 2007, U.S. Bus reported that 154 affected owners were notified,
customer notification was complete, and that repairs were started. U.S.
Bus reported that it did not know how many parts shipments were sent.
U.S. Bus also reported that Norco Industries would be conducting the
recall.
     NHTSA Recall No. 05V-257: Recall of 200 MY 2005 Sturdibus
vehicles whose windows failed to meet the retention requirements of
FMVSS 217, bus emergency exits and window retention and release,
increasing the risk that passengers could be ejected in a crash. As of
August 2007, U.S. Bus reported that there were 137 affected vehicles,
all owners had been notified and provided with repair kits. However, it
also reported that only 24 vehicles were known to have actually been
repaired. In a subsequent response from U.S. Bus, listed as being
updated on November 19, 2007, U.S. Bus reported that owners of 134 of
the 137 affected vehicles had been notified, and 44 vehicles had been
inspected and remedied. U.S. Bus reported 134 ``remedy parts kits
shipped.''
     NHTSA Recall No. 05V-336: Recall of 38 vehicles equipped
with stop arms that may fail to extend in cold weather conditions. As
of April 2007, U.S. Bus reported that it had no information on
notification or remedy of this defect and contended that the
manufacturer of the stop arm was providing notice and remedy. In a
subsequent response from U.S. Bus, listed as being updated on November
19, 2007, U.S. Bus reported that the notification was ``complete,'' and
that Specialty Manufacturing, which made the stop arms, was determining
the recall status.
     NHTSA Recall No. 05V-375: Recall of 137 MY 2005 Sturdibus
HD vehicles with body joints that failed to meet the strength
requirements of FMVSS No. 221, school bus body joint strength,
increasing the risk that body panels might separate in a crash. As of
August 2007, U.S. Bus reported that all owners had been notified,
provided with repair kits, and 24 vehicles had been repaired. In a
subsequent response from U.S. Bus, listed as being updated on November
19, 2007, U.S. Bus reported that owners of the 134 of the 137 affected
vehicles had been notified, and 44 vehicles had been inspected and
remedied. U.S. Bus also noted that ``[p]arts for Recall 01V-281 are to
be shipped as part of this recall.''
     NHTSA Recall No. 06V-416: Recall of 4019 MY 1998-2006
Universe and Sturdibus vehicles manufactured with a mirror use label
applied in a position where it cannot be seen by a seated driver as
required by FMVSS No. 111, rearview mirrors. As of its last report to
NHTSA in October 2007, U.S. Bus identified 3694 affected owners and
inspected and remedied 1510 vehicles. In a subsequent response from
U.S. Bus, listed as being updated on November 19, 2007, U.S. Bus
reported that owners of 3694 of the 4019 affected vehicles had been
notified, and 2025 vehicles had been inspected and remedied.
     NHTSA Recall No. 06V-443: Recall of 96 MY 2000-2006
Sturdibus vehicles built with seat back barriers that did not match the
contour of the seats on which they were installed, as required by FMVSS
No. 222, school bus passenger seating and crash protection, increasing
the risk that occupants might be injured in a crash. U.S. Bus reported
notifying all owners of this recall and reported shipping repair kits
to these owners. In a subsequent response from U.S. Bus, listed as
being updated on November 19, 2007, U.S. Bus reported that 96 remedy
parts kits were shipped and 5 vehicles were repaired. However, in the
same document, U.S. Bus reported that the parts are available for
shipping.
     NHTSA Recall No. 07V-056: Recall of 122 MY 2005-2006
Universe and Sturdibus vehicles manufactured without the tire and
loading label required by FMVSS No. 110, tire selection and rims for
motor vehicles with a GVWR of 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) or less,
or with the label applied incorrectly, increasing the risk that tires
might be overloaded or improperly inflated. U.S. Bus reported that all
owners of the affected vehicles were notified of this noncompliance and
25 of those vehicles had been remedied. In a subsequent response from
U.S. Bus, listed as being updated on November 19, 2007, U.S. Bus
reported that there were 129 affected vehicles. U.S. Bus also reported
mailing 129 notifications on October 27, 2007, and that 25 vehicles had
been reported to be remedied with repairs ``currently on-going and in-
process.''
     NHTSA Recall No. 07V-069: Recall of 38 vehicles built
between 2003 and January 2007 equipped with 3-passenger C.E. White
Student Safety Seats. The buses have seat attachments that do not meet
the attachment strength requirements of FMVSS No. 210, seat belt
assembly anchorages. U.S. Bus reported to NHTSA that it notified owners
of this recall in May 2007, but the number of owners who were sent
these notices and the number of vehicles that were remedied is
presently unknown to NHTSA. In a subsequent response from U.S. Bus,
listed as being updated November 19, 2007, U.S. Bus reported that there
were 38 affected vehicles, and that it had not sent notifications to
owners. U.S. Bus also reported that the ``[f]inal [r]emedy for this
recall has not been finalized.''
     NHTSA Recall 07V-155: Recall of 106 MY 2000-2006
Sturdibus, Sturdivan, and Universe vehicles equipped with Freedman
Family Seats. The buses have seat attachments and seat spacing that
does not meet the requirements of FMVSS No. 210, seat belt assembly
anchorages, and FMVSS No. 222, school bus passenger seating and crash
protection. U.S. Bus and TCI have not notified any owners of these
vehicles of this non-compliance and have not remedied any of the
vehicles involved. In a subsequent response from U.S. Bus, listed as
being updated on November 19, 2007, U.S. Bus reported that the repair
procedure was being written, and that it intended to file a revised 573
Notice.
     NHTSA Recall 07V-167: Recall of 25 MY 2006 U.S. Bus
Sturdibus and Universe buses manufactured between January 6, 2006 and
September 6, 2006 with a Ricon lift. The inner barrier interlock switch
system in the lift baseplate could fail to detect the presence of a
passenger. A wheelchair could tip backwards onto the lift platform. In
U.S. Bus' response, listed as

being updated on November 19, 2007, U.S. Bus reported that the recall
was complete and that notifications were mailed on May 1, 2007. This
report is the only report NHTSA received from U.S. Bus in regard to
this recall.
     NHTSA Recall 07V-223: Recall of 89 MY 2006-2007 model year
Sturdibus and Universe handicap accessible buses with a wheelchair lift
interlock module that may not lock the vehicle in park if the lift is
operated with low battery voltage. U.S. Bus and TCI have not notified
any owners of these vehicles of this non-compliance and have not
remedied any of the vehicles involved.
     NHTSA Recall 07V-493: Recall of 137 MY 2007 US Bus
Sturdibus School or Activity buses built on the GMT 610 Chevrolet
Express Chassis, manufactured between September 1, 2006 and September
30, 2007. The buses failed to conform with FMVSS No. 108, lamps,
reflected devices, and associated equipment. When the brakes are
applied, the stop lamps will illuminate. When the brake pedal is
released, the stop lamps are no longer illuminated but the rear brakes
may still be applied. The brake may release after a few seconds or
after the next firm brake pedal application. GM Dealers will reprogram
the anti-lock brake system module. GM's recall began on October 17,
2007. In U.S. Bus' response, listed as being updated on November 19,
2007, U.S. Bus reported that information from GM had been collected and
contact information for end users was being researched. U.S. Bus did
not send out notifications.
    NHTSA will conduct the public hearing to determine whether TCI
reasonably met its obligations under the notification requirements of
49 U.S.C. 30118-30119 and the remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. 30120.
In the event NHTSA determines that TCI is obligated to complete the
notification and/or remedy campaigns, it will order TCI to take actions
to provide proper notification and/or effective remedies.
    Procedural Matters: Interested persons are invited to participate
in this proceeding through written and/or oral presentations. Persons
wishing to make oral presentations must notify Carla Taylor, National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, W41-202, 1200 New Jersey Avenue,
SE., Washington, DC 20590; Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by fax at
(202) 366-3820, before the close of business on Tuesday, October 20,
2009. The notifications should specify the amount of time that the
presentation is expected to last, and shall include the presenter's
name, organizational affiliation, phone number, and e-mail address. The
agency will prepare a schedule of presentations. Depending upon the
number of persons who wish to make oral presentations, and the
anticipated length of those presentations, the agency may add an
additional day or days to the hearing and may limit the length of oral
presentations.
    The hearing will be held at a site accessible to individuals with
disabilities. Individuals who require accommodations, such as sign
language interpreters, should contact Mr. Zachary Dunlap using the
contact information in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section
above no later than Friday, October 9, 2009. A transcript of the
hearing and information received by NHTSA at the hearing will be placed
in the docket for this notice at a later date.
    Persons who wish to file written comments should submit them so
that they are received by NHTSA no later than Tuesday, October 20,
2009. Instructions on how to submit written comments to the docket is
located under the ADDRESSES section of this notice.

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 30118(e), 30120 (e); 49 CFR 557.7;
delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.50(a), 49 CFR 501.4(a)(3), and
49 CFR 501.8.

    Issued: September 18, 2009.
Ronald L. Medford,
Acting Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. E9-22954 Filed 9-22-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 23 (Tuesday, February 4, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 6504-6506]
[FR Doc No: 2014-02330]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 73

[Docket No. FAA-2013-1063; Airspace Docket No. 13-ASO-25]
RIN 2120-AA66

Proposed Amendment of Restricted Areas R-3008A, B, C, and D;
Grand Bay Weapons Range, GA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend the time of designation for
restricted areas R-3008A, B, C, and D, Grand Bay Weapons Range, GA, by
expanding the timeframe during which the areas may be activated without
prior issuance of a Notice to Airmen (NOTAM). This change would better
inform the flying public of routine use periods for the airspace as
well as reduce the need to issue NOTAMs when necessary to activate the
restricted areas outside the published ``core hours.''

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 21, 2014.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify FAA Docket No. FAA-2013-
1063 and Airspace Docket No. 13-ASO-25, at the beginning of your
comments. You may also submit comments through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Comments on environmental and land use aspects to
should be directed to:

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Gallant, Airspace Policy and
Regulations Group, Office of Airspace Services, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they
may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
    Communications should identify both docket numbers (FAA Docket No.
FAA-2013-1063 and Airspace Docket No. 13-ASO-25) and be submitted in
triplicate to the Docket Management System (see ADDRESSES section for
address and phone number). You may also submit comments through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
on this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to FAA Docket No. FAA-2013-1063 and Airspace Docket No. 13-ASO-25.''
The postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received on or before the specified closing date
for comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed
rule. The proposal contained in this action may be changed in light of
comments received. All comments submitted will be available for
examination in the public docket both before and after the closing date
for comments. A report

summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel
concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the docket.

Availability of NPRM's

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received and any final disposition in person at the Dockets
Office (see ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between
9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal
business hours at the office of the Operations Support Group, Eastern
Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, 1701 Columbia Ave.,
College Park, GA 30337.
    Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future
NPRM's should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
for a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application
procedure.

Background

    Restricted areas R-3008A, B, and C, Grand Bay Weapons Range, GA,
were established in July 1987 (52 FR 18552). R-3008D was added in April
1994 (59 FR 10748). Originally, the time of designation for all areas
was 0700-1900 Monday-Friday; other times by NOTAM 6 hours in advance.
The time of designation for R-3008A, B, C and D was expanded to 0700-
2200 local time Monday-Friday; other times by NOTAM 6 hours in advance
to accommodate increased night flying training requirements (62 FR
67268, February 26, 1998). The restricted areas may also be activated
outside the above ``core hours,'' including on weekends, provided a
NOTAM is issued 6 hours in advance.
    For several years, use of the restricted areas by the 23rd Wing at
Moody Air Force Base, GA, has routinely extended past the charted 2200
local time on Monday through Thursday (routine use on Fridays has
remained 0700-2200 local time). This requires the using agency to issue
NOTAMs daily from Monday to Thursday in order to activate the airspace
between 2200 and 0130 local time. In addition, current usage has shown
that operations during the Monday to Thursday period normally begin at
0800 local time instead of 0700.

The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to 14 CFR part 73 to change the
time of designation for restricted areas R-3008A, B, C, and D, Grand
Bay Weapons Range, GA, from ``0700-2200 local time, Monday-Friday;
other times by NOTAM 6 hours in advance,'' to ``0800-0130 local time
Monday-Thursday; 0700-2200 hours local time Friday; other times by
NOTAM 6 hours in advance.'' The change would expand the time frame
during which the restricted areas could be activated without prior
issuance of a NOTAM.
    The proposed times would capture the vast majority of the day-to-
day operations currently occurring in R-3008, provide more accurate
notice to the flying public of expected routine use of the airspace and
reduce the time and workload needed to issue daily NOTAMs. A NOTAM
would still be required to activate the airspace outside the proposed
amended times, to include any weekend operations.
    As with the current practice, the restricted areas would be
returned to the controlling agency and made available for access by
nonparticipating aircraft during periods when the airspace is not
needed by the using agency.
    The FAA would also make a minor editorial change to the R-3008C
description by moving the wording that excludes the airspace around the
city of Lakeland, GA from the ``designated altitudes'' section to the
``boundaries'' section. This change would retain the exclusion
requirement, but would simply move the text to a different place in the
description of R-3008C.
    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
Therefore, this proposed regulation: (1) Is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a
``significant rule'' under Department of Transportation (DOT)
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that
will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this proposed rule, when promulgated, will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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.
    This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of the
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This proposed regulation is within the scope of that
authority as it would amend the time of designation for restricted area
R-3008 to accommodate essential military training and better inform the
flying public of expected usage of the airspace.

Environmental Review

    This proposal will be subjected to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1E, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies
and Procedures,'' prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 73

    Airspace, Prohibited Areas, Restricted Areas.

The Proposed Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 73 as follows:

PART 73--SPECIAL USE AIRSPACE

0
1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854,
24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  73.30  (Amended)

0
2. Sec.  73.30 is amended as follows:
* * * * *

1. R-3008A Grand Bay Weapons Range, GA [Amended]

    By removing ``Time of designation. 0700-2200 local time, Monday-
Friday; other times by NOTAM 6 hours in advance,'' and adding in its
place ``Time of designation. 0800-0130 local time, Monday-Thursday;
0700-2200 local time Friday; other times by NOTAM 6 hours in advance.

2. R-3008B Grand Bay Weapons Range, GA [Amended]

    By removing ``Time of designation. 0700-2200 local time, Monday-
Friday; other times by NOTAM 6 hours in advance,'' and adding in its
place ``Time of designation. 0800-0130 local time, Monday-Thursday;
0700-2200 local time Friday; other times by NOTAM 6 hours in advance.

3. R-3008C Grand Bay Weapons Range, GA [Amended]

    By removing the current Boundaries, Designated altitudes and Time
of designation, and adding in their place:
    Boundaries. Beginning at lat. 31[deg]04'01'' N., long.
83[deg]01'00'' W.; to lat. 31[deg]04'01'' N., long. 83[deg]08'00'' W.;
to lat. 31[deg]02'01'' N., long. 83[deg]09'00'' W.; to lat.
31[deg]01'31'' N., long. 83[deg]06'00'' W.; to lat. 30[deg]54'31'' N.,
long. 83[deg]06'00'' W.; to lat. 30[deg]53'31'' N., long.
83[deg]09'00'' W.; to lat. 30[deg]51'01'' N., long. 83[deg]08'00'' W.;
to lat. 30[deg]51'01'' N., long. 83[deg]01'00'' W.; to the point of
beginning; excluding the airspace below 1,500 feet AGL within a one
nautical mile radius of lat. 31[deg]02'31'' N., long. 83[deg]04'15'' W
(Lakeland, GA).
    Designated altitudes. 500 feet AGL to 10,000 feet MSL.
    Time of designation. 0800-0130 local time, Monday-Thursday; 0700-
2200 local time Friday; other times by NOTAM 6 hours in advance.

4. R-3008D Grand Bay Weapons Range, GA [Amended]

    By removing ``Time of designation. 0700-2200 local time, Monday-
Friday; other times by NOTAM 6 hours in advance,'' and adding in its
place ``Time of designation. 0800-0130 local time, Monday-Thursday;
0700-2200 local time Friday; other times by NOTAM 6 hours in advance.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on January 29, 2014.
Gary A. Norek,
Manager, Airspace Policy and Regulations Group.
[FR Doc. 2014-02330 Filed 2-3-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 114 (Wednesday, June 13, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 35308-35310]
[FR Doc No: 2012-14404]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 73

[Docket No. FAA-2012-0561; Airspace Docket No. 12-AEA-7]

Proposed Amendment of Restricted Area R-6601; Fort A.P. Hill, VA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to expand the vertical limits and time of
designation of restricted area R-6601, Fort A.P. Hill, VA. The U. S.
Army requested this action to provide the additional airspace needed to
conduct training in high-angle weapons systems employment.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 30, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify FAA Docket No. FAA-2012-
0561 and Airspace Docket No. 12-AEA-7, at the beginning of your
comments. You may also submit comments through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Comments on environmental and land use aspects to
should be directed to: Director of Environmental and Natural Resources
Division, Attn: Ms. Terry Banks, U.S. Army Garrison, Fort A.P. Hill, VA
22427; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Gallant, Airspace, Regulations
and ATC Procedures Group, Office of Airspace Services, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they
may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
    Communications should identify both docket numbers (FAA Docket No.
FAA-2012-0561 and Airspace Docket No. 12-AEA-7) and be submitted in
triplicate to the Docket Management System (see ADDRESSES section for
address and phone number). You may also submit comments through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
on this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to FAA Docket No. FAA-2012-0561 and Airspace Docket No. 12-AEA-7.'' The
postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
    Comments on environmental and land use aspects to should be
directed to: Director of Environmental and Natural Resource Division,
U.S. Army Garrison, Fort A.P. Hill, VA, 22427; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    All communications received on or before the specified closing date
for comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed
rule. The proposal contained in this action may be changed in light of
comments received. All comments submitted will be available for
examination in the public docket both before and after the closing date
for comments. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with
FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's web page at http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received and any final disposition in

person at the Dockets Office (see ADDRESSES section for address and
phone number) between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during
normal business hours at the office of the Operations Support Group,
Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, 1701 Columbia
Ave., College Park, GA 30337.
    Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future
NPRMs should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
for a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application
procedure.

Background

    Fort A.P. Hill has a continuing requirement to conduct training in
the use of various high- angle weapons systems. This training cannot be
contained within the current 5,000-foot MSL ceiling of restricted area
R-6601. Currently, this training is conducted in a controlled firing
area (CFA) situated above R-6601. However, the FAA determined that the
activities no longer meet the criteria for a CFA. As a result, military
units have had to cancel high-angle weapon system training. Recurring
training in these events is necessary to maintain currency. This
training is even more critical for units that are preparing to deploy
into a theater of operations where the use of these tactics is
required.

The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to 14 CFR part 73 to expand the
vertical limits and the time of designation for restricted area R-6601,
Fort A.P. Hill, VA. R-6601 currently extends from the ``surface to
5,000 feet MSL,'' with a time of designation of ``0700 to 2300 local
time daily; other times by NOTAM at least 48 hours in advance.''
    The proposed new restricted airspace would extend up to 9,000 feet
MSL and would consist of three sub-areas designated R-6601A, R-6601B
and R-6601C. R-6601A would extend from the surface to but not including
4,500 feet MSL, instead of the current 5,000 feet MSL for R-6601. R-
6601B would extend from 4,500 feet MSL to but not including 7,500 feet
MSL; and R-6601C would extend from 7,500 feet MSL to 9,000 feet MSL.
Subdividing the airspace in this manner would allow activation of only
that portion of restricted airspace required for training while leaving
the remaining airspace available for other users. In addition, a Letter
of Agreement would be concluded between the using and controlling
agencies stipulating that the controlling agency can recall the
airspace in the event of Severe Weather Avoidance Plan (SWAP)
implementation, weather diverts and emergencies.
    R-6601A would have the same lateral boundaries as the original R-
6601. R-6601B and R-6601C would overlie the boundaries of R-6601A,
except at the northeast end where the shared R-6601B and R-6601C
boundary would be moved southwesterly approximately \3/4\ mile from R-
6601A's northeastern boundary. This would provide a buffer between R-
6601B and C and the centerline of VOR Federal airway V-386.
    The proposed time of designation for R-6601A would be changed from
the current ``0700 to 2300 local time daily,'' to ``0700 to 0200 local
time daily,'' an increase of three hours daily. In addition, the
advance NOTAM requirement for activation of R-6601A at other times
would be reduced from the current 48 hours to 24 hours. The time of
designation for both R-6601B and R-6601C would be ``By NOTAM 24 hours
in advance.''
    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
Therefore, this proposed regulation: (1) Is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a
``significant rule'' under Department of Transportation (DOT)
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that
will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this proposed rule, when promulgated, will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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.
    This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
SubtitleVII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of the
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it would restructure the restricted airspace at Fort A.P. Hill, VA,
to support essential military training activities.

Environmental Review

    This proposal will be subjected to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1E, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies
and Procedures,'' prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 73

    Airspace, Prohibited Areas, Restricted Areas.

The Proposed Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 73 as follows:

PART 73--SPECIAL USE AIRSPACE

    1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854,
24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  73.66  (Amended)

    2. Sec.  73.66 is amended as follows:
* * * * *

1. R-6601 Fort A.P. Hill, VA [Remove]

2. R-6601A Fort A.P. Hill, VA [New]

    Boundaries. Beginning at lat. 38[deg]04'37'' N., long.
77[deg]18'44'' W.; then along U.S. Highway 301; to lat. 38[deg]09'45''
N., long. 77[deg]11'59'' W.; then along U.S. Highway 17; to lat.
38[deg]07'50'' N., long. 77[deg]08'29'' W.; to lat. 38[deg]05'30'' N.,
long. 77[deg]09'05'' W.; to lat. 38[deg]04'40'' N., long.
77[deg]10'19'' W.; to lat. 38[deg]03'12'' N., long. 77[deg]09'34'' W.;
to lat. 38[deg]02'22'' N., long. 77[deg]11'39'' W.; to lat.
38[deg]02'30'' N., long. 77[deg]14'39'' W.; to lat. 38[deg]01'50'' N.,
long. 77[deg]16'07'' W.; to lat. 38[deg]02'15'' N., long.
77[deg]18'03'' W.; to lat. 38[deg]02'40'' N., long. 77[deg]18'59'' W.;
then to the point of beginning.
    Designated altitudes. Surface to but not including 4,500 feet MSL.
    Time of Designation. 0700 to 0200 local time daily. Other times by
NOTAM 24 hours in advance.
    Controlling agency. FAA, Potomac TRACON.
    Using agency. U.S. Army, Commander, Fort A.P. Hill, VA.

3. R-6601B Fort A.P. Hill, VA [New]

    Boundaries. Beginning at lat. 38[deg]04'37'' N., long.
77[deg]18'44'' W.; then along U.S. Highway 301 to lat. 38[deg]09'38''
N., long. 77[deg]12'07'' W.; to lat. 38[deg]07'09'' N., long.
77[deg]08'40'' W.; to lat. 38[deg]05'30'' N., long. 77[deg]09'05'' W.;
to lat. 38[deg]04'40''

N., long. 77[deg]10'19'' W.; to lat. 38[deg]03'12'' N., long.
77[deg]09'34'' W.; to lat. 38[deg]02'22'' N., long. 77[deg]11'39'' W.;
to lat. 38[deg]02'30'' N., long. 77[deg]14'39'' W.; to lat.
38[deg]01'50'' N., long. 77[deg]16'07'' W.; to lat. 38[deg]02'15'' N.,
long. 77[deg]18'03'' W.; to lat. 38[deg]02'40'' N., long.
77[deg]18'59'' W.; then to the point of beginning.
    Designated altitudes. 4,500 feet MSL to but not including 7,500
feet MSL.
    Time of designation. By NOTAM 24 hours in advance.
    Controlling agency. FAA, Potomac TRACON.
    Using agency. U.S. Army, Commander, Fort A.P. Hill, VA.

4. R-6601C Fort A.P. Hill, VA [New]

    Boundaries. Beginning at lat. 38[deg]04'37'' N., long.
77[deg]18'44'' W.; then along U.S. Highway 301 to lat. 38[deg]09'38''
N., long. 77[deg]12'07'' W.; to lat. 38[deg]07'09'' N., long.
77[deg]08'40'' W.; to lat. 38[deg]05'30'' N., long. 77[deg]09'05'' W.;
to lat. 38[deg]04'40'' N., long. 77[deg]10'19'' W.; to lat.
38[deg]03'12'' N., long. 77[deg]09'34'' W.; to lat. 38[deg]02'22'' N.,
long. 77[deg]11'39'' W.; to lat. 38[deg]02'30'' N., long.
77[deg]14'39'' W.; to lat. 38[deg]01'50'' N., long. 77[deg]16'07'' W.;
to lat. 38[deg]02'15'' N., long. 77[deg]18'03'' W.; to lat.
38[deg]02'40'' N., long. 77[deg]18'59'' W.; then to the point of
beginning.
    Designated altitudes. 7,500 feet MSL to 9,000 feet MSL.
    Time of designation. By NOTAM 24 hours in advance.
    Controlling agency. FAA, Potomac TRACON.
    Using agency. U.S. Army, Commander, Fort A.P. Hill, VA.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on June 7, 2012.
Colby Abbott,
Acting Manager, Airspace, Regulations and ATC Procedures Group.
[FR Doc. 2012-14404 Filed 6-12-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: January 19, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 12)]
[Notices]
[Page 2577-2578]
[DOCID:fr19ja07-100]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-55069; File No. SR-NYSE-2006-117]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectivenes of Proposed Rule Change to
Eliminate the Exemption from Equity Trading Fees for Principal
Transactions by a Member Organization ``Facilitating'' a Customer Order
of at Least 10,000 Shares

January 9, 2007.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on December 22, 2006, the New York Stock Exchange LLC (``Exchange'' or
``NYSE'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been substantially prepared by the
Exchange. NYSE has designated this proposal as one establishing or
changing a due, fee, or other charge imposed by NYSE under Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder,\4\
which renders the proposed rule change effective upon filing with the
Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to eliminate, effective January 1, 2007, the
exemption from equity trading fees applicable to principal transactions
by a member organization in conjunction with ``facilitating'' a
customer order of at least 10,000 shares.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available at NYSE, the
Commission's Public Reference Room, and http://www.nyse.com.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these

statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below.
The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C
below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to eliminate, effective January 1, 2007, the
exemption from equity trading fees applicable to principal transactions
by a member organization in conjunction with ``facilitating'' a
customer order of at least 10,000 shares.\5\ The elimination of this
exemption is consistent with the Exchange's policy of simplifying its
fee structure by eliminating exemptions and implementing a single-tier
flat fee structure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ For this purpose ``facilitating'' refers to taking the other
side of a customer's order, or acquiring/liquidating inventory to
buy/sell to a customer at an agreed-upon price.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the objectives of Section 6 of the Act \6\ in general and furthers
the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) \7\ in particular, in that it is
designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues,
fees and other charges among its members and other persons using its
facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    The foregoing proposed rule change has become effective upon filing
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \8\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) \9\
thereunder because it establishes or changes a due, fee, or other
charge imposed by the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \9\ 17 CFR 19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml.
); or     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File No. SR-NYSE-2006-117 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2006-117. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail 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 Commissions Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).

Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the
Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such filing also will be
available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the
NYSE. All comments received will be posted without change; the
Commission does not edit personal identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-
NYSE-2006-117 and should be submitted on or before February 9, 2007.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 07-139 Filed 1-18-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-M


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 58 (Friday, March 25, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16269-16270]
[FR Doc No: 2016-06731]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2016-0003; Notice 1]

Continental Tire the Americas, LLC, Receipt of Petition for
Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance

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

ACTION: Receipt of petition.

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

SUMMARY: Continental Tire the Americas, LLC (CTA), has determined that
certain CTA tires do not fully comply with paragraph S5.5(f) of Federal
Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 139 New Pneumatic Radial
Tires for Light Vehicles. CTA filed a report dated December 11, 2015,
pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility
and Reports. CTA then petitioned NHTSA under 49 CFR part 556 requesting
a decision that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor
vehicle safety.

DATES: The closing date for comments on the petition is April 25, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written data,
views, and arguments regarding this petition. Comments must refer to
the docket and notice number cited in the title of this notice and be
submitted by any of the following methods:
     Mail: Send comments by mail addressed to 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 Deliver: Deliver comments by hand to U.S. Department
of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. The
Docket Section is open on weekdays from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. except
Federal Holidays.
     Electronically: Submit comments electronically by logging
onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Web site at http://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Comments may also be faxed to<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comments must be written in the English language, and be no greater
than 15 pages in length, although there is no limit to the length of
necessary attachments to the comments. If comments are submitted in
hard copy form, please ensure that two copies are provided. If you wish
to receive confirmation that comments you have submitted by mail were
received, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard with the
comments. Note that all comments received will be posted without change
to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided.
    The petition, supporting materials, and all comments received
before the close of business on the closing date indicated above will
be filed in the docket and will be considered. All comments and
supporting materials received after the closing date will also be filed
and will be considered to the extent possible.
    When the petition is granted or denied, notice of the decision will
also be published in the Federal Register pursuant to the authority
indicated at the end of this notice.
    All documents submitted to the docket may be viewed by anyone at
the address and times given above. The documents may also be viewed on
the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by following the online
instructions for accessing the dockets. The docket ID number for this
petition is shown in the heading of this notice.
    DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement is available for review in the
Federal Register published on April 11, 2000, (65 FR 19477-78).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    I. Overview: Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) (see
implementing regulations at 49 CFR part 556), CTA submitted a petition
for an exemption from the notification and remedy requirements of 49
U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the basis that this noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
    This notice of receipt of CTA's petition is published under 49
U.S.C. 30118 and 30120 and does not represent any agency decision or
other exercise of judgment concerning the merits of the petition.
    II. Tires Involved: Affected are approximately 1,800 General Tire
brand Grabber size LT265/75R16 112/109 Q LRC tires that were
manufactured between December 10, 2010 and September 9, 2013.

    III. Noncompliance: CTA explains that due to a mold error, the
number of tread plies indicated on the sidewall of the subject tires
does not match the actual number of plies in the tire construction. The
tires are marked ``PLIES: TREAD: 2 POLYESTER + 2 STEEL + 2 POLYAMIDE''
whereas the correct marking should be: ``PLIES: TREAD: 2 POLYESTER + 2
STEEL + 1 POLYAMIDE.'' As a consequence, these tires do not meet
requirements specified in paragraph S5.5(f) of FMVSS No. 139.
    IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S5.5(f) of FMVSS No. 139 states, in
pertinent part:

    S5.5 Tire Markings. Except as specified in paragraph (a) through
(i) of S5.5, each tire must be marked on each sidewall with the
information specified in S5.5(a) through (d) and on one sidewall
with the information specified in S5.5(e) through (i) according to
the phase-in schedule specified in S7 of this standard. . .
    (f) The actual number of plies in the sidewall, and the actual
number of plies in the tread area, if different.

    V. Summary of CTA's Petition: CTA described the subject
noncompliance and stated its belief that the noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
    In support of its petition, CTA submitted the following information
pertaining to the subject noncompliance:
    (a) CTA stated that the tires covered by this petition are labeled
with incorrect information regarding the number of tread plies. The
company noted that while the number of polyester and steel plies
indicated on the sidewall is accurate, the number of polyamide plies
indicated is incorrect. The company contended, however, that this
mislabeling has no impact on the operational performance of these tires
or on the safety of vehicles on which these tires are mounted. The
company asserted that the tires meet or exceed all of the performance
requirements of FMVSS No. 139.
    (b) CTA noted that NHTSA has concluded in response to numerous
other petitions that this type of noncompliance is inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety. CTA referenced notices that NHTSA has published
in the Federal Register granting the following inconsequentiality
petitions:
     Petition of Hankook Tire America Corp., 79 FR 30688 (May
28, 2014);
     Petition of Bridgestone Americas Tire Operations, LLC, 78
FR 47049 (August 2, 2013);
     Petition of Cooper Tire & Rubber Company, 78 FR 47050
(August 2, 2013).
    (C) CTA states that all tires covered by its petition meet or
exceed the performance requirements of FMVSS No. 139, as well as the
other labeling requirements of the standard.
    (d) CTA also states that it is not aware of any crashes, injuries,
customer complaints, or field reports associated with the subject
noncompliance.
    CTA additionally informed NHTSA that it has quarantined all
existing inventory of the tires that contain the noncompliant tire
sidewall labeling and has corrected the molds at the manufacturing
plant so that no additional tires will be manufactured with the
noncompliance.
    In summation, CTA believes that the described noncompliance is
inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety, and that its
petition to be exempted from providing notification of the
noncompliance, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118, and to remedy the
noncompliance, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120, should be granted.
    NHTSA notes that the statutory provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to file petitions for a
determination of inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to exempt manufacturers
only from the duties found in sections 30118 and 30120, respectively,
to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or noncompliance
and to remedy the defect or noncompliance. Therefore, any decision on
this petition only applies to the subject tires that CTA no longer
controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance existed.
However, any decision on this petition does not relieve equipment
distributors and dealers from the prohibitions on the sale, offer for
sale, or introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate
commerce of the noncompliant tires under their control after CTA
notified them that the subject noncompliance exists.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: Delegations of authority at
49 CFR 1.95 and 501.8.

Jeffrey M. Giuseppe,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2016-06731 Filed 3-24-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register: December 20, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 244)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 76200-76204]
[DOCID:fr20de06-20]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0536; FRL-8107-7]

Fluroxypyr; Pesticide Tolerance

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for combined residues
of fluroxypyr in or on onion, bulb; garlic, bulb; and shallot, bulb.
The Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4) requested these
tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), as
amended by the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA).

DATES: This regulation is effective December 20, 2006. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before February 20, 2007,
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: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0536. All documents in the
docket are listed in the index for the docket. Although listed in the
index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available in the electronic docket at http://www.regulations.gov., or,

if only available in hard copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in
Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Building), 2777 S. Crystal Drive,
Arlington, VA. The Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shaja R. Brothers, Registration
Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail 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.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:
     Crop production (NAICS 111), e.g., agricultural workers;
greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture workers; farmers.
     Animal production (NAICS 112), e.g., cattle ranchers and
farmers, dairy cattle farmers, livestock farmers.
     Food manufacturing (NAICS 311), e.g., agricultural
workers; farmers; greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture workers;
ranchers; pesticide applicators.
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS 32532), e.g., agricultural
workers; commercial applicators; farmers; greenhouse, nursery, and
floriculture workers; residential users.
    This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular
entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.

B. How Can I Access Electronic Copies of This Document?

    In addition to accessing an electronic copy of this Federal
Register document through the electronic docket at http://www.regulations.gov.
, you may access this Federal Register document

electronically through the EPA Internet under the ``Federal Register''
listings at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr. You may also access a

frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR part 180 through the
Government Printing Office's pilot e-CFR site at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr
.

C. Can I File an Objection or Hearing Request?

    Under section 408(g) of the FFDCA, as amended by the FQPA, any
person may file an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may
also request a hearing on those objections. The EPA procedural
regulations which govern the submission of objections and requests for
hearings appear in 40 CFR part 178. 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-2005-0536 in the
subject line on the first page of your submission. All requests must be
in writing, and must be mailed or delivered to the Hearing Clerk on or
before February 20, 2007.
    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 that does not contain any CBI for inclusion in the public
docket that is described in ADDRESSES. Information not marked
confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA
without prior notice. Submit your copies, identified by Docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0536, by one of the following methods:

     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.

Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Building), 2777 S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation (8:30 a.m. to 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays). Special
arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The
Docket telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

II. Background and Statutory Findings

    In the Federal Register of April 21, 2006 (71 FR 20661) (FRL-8065-
1), EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP
3E6775) by IR-4, 500 College Road East, Suite 201 West, Princeton, NJ
08540. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.535 be amended by
establishing tolerances for combined residues of the herbicide
fluroxypyr, 1-methylheptyl ester [1-methylheptyl ((4-amino-3,5-
dichloro-6-fluoro-2-pyridinyl)oxy)acetate] and its metabolite
fluroxypyr [((4-amino-3,5-dichloro-6-fluoro-2-pyridinyl)oxy)acetic
acid], in or on garlic and shallot (bulb), and onion (dry bulb) at 0.03
parts per million (ppm). The notice included a summary of the petition
prepared by Dow AgroSciences, the registrant. Comments on the notice of
filing were received from one private citizen. EPA's response to these
comments is discussed in Unit IV.C.
    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 4
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. * *
*''
    EPA performs a number of analyses to determine the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide residues. For further discussion of the
regulatory requirements of section 408 of the FFDCA and a complete
description of the risk assessment process, see http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/1997/November/Day-26/p30948.htm
.

III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, 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, consistent with section
408(b)(2) of FFDCA, for tolerances for combined residues of fluroxypyr
on onion, bulb; garlic, bulb; and shallot, bulb at 0.03 ppm. EPA's
assessment of exposures and risks associated with establishing the
tolerances follow.

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. Specific information on the studies received and the nature
of the toxic effects caused by fluroxypyr 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.
 Docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0536, Fluroxypyr

Field Corn Human Health Risk Assessment, pages 12-15.

B. Toxicological Endpoints

    For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, the dose at which no adverse effects are observed
(the NOAEL) from the toxicology study identified as appropriate for use
in risk assessment is used to estimate the toxicological level of
concern (LOC). However, the lowest dose at which adverse effects of
concern are identified (the LOAEL) is sometimes used for risk
assessment if no NOAEL was achieved in the toxicology study selected.
An uncertainty, factor (UF) is applied to reflect uncertainties
inherent in the extrapolation from laboratory animal data to humans and
in the variations in sensitivity among members of the human population
as well as other unknowns.
    The linear default risk methodology (Q*) is the primary method
currently used by the Agency to quantify non-threshold hazards such as
cancer. The Q* approach assumes that any amount of exposure will lead
to some degree of cancer risk, estimates risk in terms of the
probability of occurrence of additional cancer cases. More information
can be found on the general principles EPA uses in risk
characterization at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/health/human.htm.

    A summary of the toxicological endpoints for fluroxypyr used for
human risk assessment can be found at http://www.regulations.gov. Docket ID

number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0536, Fluroxypyr Field Corn Human Health Risk
Assessment, page 13; and Fluroxypyr Dry Bulb Onion Human Health Risk
Assessment, pages 17-18.

C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. Tolerances have been
established (40 CFR 180.535) for the combined residues of fluroxypyr,
in or on the following raw agricultural commodities: Barley, corn,
grain, oat, sorghum, and wheat. Tolerances are also established for
cattle, goat, hog, horse, sheep, and milk. Additionally, time limited
tolerances are established in 40 CFR 180.535(b) in or on corn and
onion. Risk assessments were conducted by EPA to assess dietary
exposures from fluroxypyr in food as follow:
    i. Acute exposure. There were no toxic effects attributable to a
single dose. An endpoint of concern was not identified to quantitate an
acute-dietary risk to the U.S. general population or to the
subpopulation females 13-50 years old. Therefore, an acute aggregate
exposure assessment was not performed.
    ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model software with
the Food Commodity Intake Database (DEEM-FCID\TM\), which incorporates
food consumption data as reported by respondents in the USDA 1994-1996
and 1998 Nationwide Continuing Surveys of Food Intake by Individuals
(CSFII); and accumulated exposure to the chemical for each commodity.
The following assumptions were made for the chronic exposure
assessment: An unrefined, Tier 1 chronic dietary-exposure assessment
was conducted for all supported fluroxypyr food uses. In this
assessment, tolerance level residues

and 100% crop treated (CT) was assumed for all crops included in the
analysis. The assumptions result in highly conservative dietary
exposure estimates.
    iii. Cancer. A cancer dietary assessment was not conducted since
fluroxypyr has been classified as ``not likely'' to be carcinogenic.
    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency lacks
sufficient monitoring exposure data to complete a comprehensive dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment for fluroxypyr in drinking water.
Because the Agency does not have comprehensive monitoring data,
drinking water concentration estimates are made by reliance on
simulation or modeling taking into account data on the physical
characteristics of fluroxypyr. Further information regarding EPA
drinking water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be
found at http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/index.htm.

    Refined (Tier II) surface water concentrations were developed for
fluroxypyr with the Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure Analysis
Modeling System (PRZM/EXAMS) model, using an index reservoir scenario
for the aerial application of fluroxypyr on rangeland and permanent
grass pastures. The model assumes that fluroxypyr is applied at the
maximum label rate (0.5 lb ae/acre). The estimated annual average
environmental concentration of fluroxypyr in surface water is 3.3 parts
per billion (ppb).
    For the ground water estimated concentration, the Tier I Screening
Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-GROW) model predicts that fluroxypyr
will be found at relatively small concentrations when the herbicide is
applied at the maximum recommended application rate of 0.5 lbs ae/acre.
The estimate is 0.042 ppb (0.042 [mu]g/L). This conservative estimate
is a default value generated by the SCI-GROW model.
    Based on the PRZM/EXAMS and SCI-GROW models, the estimated
environmental concentrations (EECs) of fluroxypyr for surface water are
estimated to be 3.3 ppb, and 0.04 ppb for ground water. Modeled
estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly entered into
the dietary exposure model (DEEM-FCID\TM\). For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the annual average concentration of 3.3 ppb was used to
access the contribution to drinking water.
    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).
    Fluroxypyr (Vista\TM\) is registered for application to residential
turfgrass and recreational sites such as golf courses, parks, and
sports fields. The proposed label does not prohibit homeowners from
mixing/loading/applying Vista\TM\.
    Residential handlers may receive short-term dermal and inhalation
exposure to fluroxypyr when mixing, loading and applying the
formulations. Adults and children may be exposed to fluroxypyr residues
from dermal contact with turf during post-application activities.
Toddlers may also receive short and intermediate-term oral exposure
from incidental ingestion during post-application activities.
    In conducting the short and intermediate-term aggregate risk
assessments, the Agency made the following conservative assumptions.
     Incidental oral and inhalation exposures for the aggregate
residential handler scenario included children and adults (U.S.
population subgroup).
     Incidental oral exposure from treated areas included
infants and children (up to age 12) for the aggregate post-application
scenario.
     Inhalation exposure resulting from residential application
included youth (age 13-19 years old), and the adult population
subgroups.
    4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of the 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.''
    Unlike other pesticides for which EPA has followed a cumulative
risk approach based on a common mechanism of toxicity, EPA has not made
a common mechanism of toxicity finding as to fluroxypyr and any other
substances and fluroxypyr does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite
produced by other substances. For the purposes of this tolerance
action, therefore, EPA has not assumed that fluroxypyr has 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
the policy statements released by EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs
concerning common mechanism determinations and procedures for
cumulating effects from substances found to have a common mechanism on
EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.

D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

    1. In general. Section 408 of FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply
an additional tenfold 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 data base on toxicity and exposure
unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a different margin of
safety will be safe for infants and children. Margins of safety are
incorporated into EPA risk assessments either directly through use of a
MOE analysis or through using uncertainty (safety) factors in
calculating a dose level that poses no appreciable risk to humans. In
applying this provision, EPA either retains the default value of 10X
when reliable data do not support the choice of a different factor, or,
if reliable data are available, EPA uses a different additional safety
factor value based on the use of traditional uncertainty factors and/or
special FQPA safety factors, as appropriate.
    2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. There was no evidence
(quantitative/qualitative) of increased susceptibility following in
utero exposure to the acid and the ester in rats and rabbits, or
following prenatal and/or postnatal exposure to the acid form in rats.
    3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show that it
would be safe for infants and children to reduce the FQPA safety factor
to 1X. That decision is based on the following findings:
     The toxicity database for fluroxypyr is complete.
     There was no evidence of neurotoxicity or neuropathology
in the available studies.
     There was no evidence (quantitative/qualitative) of
increased susceptibility following pre and/or postnatal exposure.
     The chronic dietary food exposure assessment utilizes
tolerance level residue estimates and assumes 100% CT for all
commodities. This assessment is not likely to underestimate exposure/
risk.
     The dietary drinking water assessment utilizes water
concentration values generated by model and associated modeling
parameters designed to provide conservative, health protective, high-
end estimates of water concentrations which will not likely be
exceeded.

     The residential exposure assessment was conducted using
standard assumptions based on carefully reviewed data.

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

    1. Acute risk. There were no toxic effects attributable to a single
dose. An endpoint of concern was not identified for any population
subgroup. Therefore, fluroxypyr is not expected to pose an acute risk.
    2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that exposure to
fluroxypyr from food and water will utilize < 1% of the cPAD for the
U.S. population, < 1% of the cPAD for all infants < 1 year old, and 1.4%
of the cPAD for children 1-2 years old. Based on the use pattern,
chronic residential exposure to residues of fluroxypyr is not expected.
    3. Short and intermediate-term risk. Short and intermediate-term
aggregate exposures are likely to result from exposure to fluroxypyr
residues from food, drinking water, and residential pesticide uses.
High-end estimates are used for residential exposure, while average
values are used for food and drinking water. Short and intermediate-
term risk assessments are required for adults (residential handler
inhalation exposure scenario), in addition to infants and children
(residential post-application oral exposure scenario).
    Using the exposure assumptions described for non-dietary short and
intermediate-term exposures, EPA has concluded that food, water, and
residential exposures aggregated result in aggregate MOEs from 4,400 to
54,000 (adults 50+ years old). The MOEs are 8,300 and 4,400 for the
U.S. population, and children 1-2 years old (the most highly exposed
subgroup), respectively.
    4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Fluroxypyr has been
classified as ``not likely'' to be carcinogenic. Therefore, fluroxypyr
is not expected to pose a cancer risk.
    5. 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, and to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to fluroxypyr residues.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    The gas chromatography/mass-selective detector (GC/MSD) analytical
method used to determine residues of fluroxypyr in both the acid and
methylheptyl ester forms is adequate to recover residues of fluroxypyr
and fluroxypyr 1-MHE in dry bulb onions. The method converts the
methylheptyl ester form of fluroxypyr to the acid and results are
reported as the acid equivalent. The lower limit of method validation
(LLMV) for bulb onions was 0.01 ppm. Further, the method is an
adaptation of a Dow AgroSciencesmethod GRM 96.02, which has been
adequately validated as an enforcement method; therefore the Agency
considers the modified method to be adequate to enforce the requested
tolerance.
    Adequate enforcement methodology (GC/MSD) is available to enforce
the tolerance expression. The method may be requested from: Chief,
Analytical Chemistry Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes
Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755-5350; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
B. International Residue Limits

    There are currently no Codex, Canadian, or Mexican maximum residue
limits for fluroxypyr or its metabolites in/on dry bulb onions.

C. Response to Comments

    A private citizen of Florham Park, New Jersey submitted public
comments on the fluroxypyr notice of filing. The private citizen
commented on the cancer finding classification ``not likely a
carcinogen,'' and views the statement deceptive.
    EPA's response: The cancer classification ``Not Likely to be
Carcinogenic to Humans'' comes from EPA's Guidelines for Carcinogen
Risk Assessment. These Guidelines recommend this descriptor when the
available data are considered robust for deciding that there is no
basis for human hazard concern. These Guidelines were developed as part
of an Agency-wide guidelines development program by a Technical Panel
of the U.S. EPA's Risk Assessment Forum, which was composed of
scientists from throughout the Agency. Selected drafts were peer
reviewed internally by the U.S. EPA's Science Advisory Board, and by
experts from universities, environmental groups, industry and other
governmental agencies. The Guidelines were also subjected to several
public comment periods. For additional information regarding EPA's
Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk and recommended descriptor language
please refer to the Federal Register of April 7, 2005 (70 FR 17765)
(FRL-7896-1) (http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-TOX/2005/April/Day-07/t6642.htm
].

    The private citizen also commented on profiteers utilizing the
Agency to promote poor products to the American citizens.
    EPA's response: This comment is not germane to EPA's statutory
basis for acting on fluroxypyr tolerance petition. Thus, a technical
response to this comment is not required. The private citizen's
comments contained no scientific data or other substantive evidence to
rebut the Agency's conclusion that there is a reasonable certainty that
no harm will result from aggregate exposure to fluroxypyr from the
establishment of these tolerances.

V. Conclusion

    Therefore, the tolerances are established for combined residues of
fluroxypyr, 1-methylheptyl ester [1-methylheptyl] ((4-amino-3,5-
dichloro-6-fluoro-2-pyridinyl)oxy)acetate] and its metabolite
fluroxypyr [((4-amino-3,5-dichloro-6-fluoro-2-pyridinyl)oxy)acetic
acid], in or on onion, bulb; garlic, bulb; and shallot, bulb at 0.03
ppm.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This final rule establishes a tolerance under section 408(d) of
FFDCA 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 rule has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866 due to its lack of
significance, this rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211,
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This final rule does
not contain any information collections subject to OMB approval under
the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., or impose
any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as described under
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Pub. L.
104-4). 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); or OMB review or any Agency action under Executive
Order 13045, entitled Protection of Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). 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 of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law
104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). Since tolerances and
exemptions that are established on the basis of a petition under
section 408(d) of FFDCA, such as the tolerance 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.
In addition, the Agency has determined that this action will not have a
substantial direct effect on States, on the relationship between the
national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified
in Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to develop an accountable
process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input by State and local
officials in the development of regulatory policies that have
federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism
implications'' is defined in the Executive order to include regulations
that 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.'' This final rule directly regulates growers, food
processors, food handlers and food retailers, not States. This action
does not alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. For these same reasons, the Agency has
determined that this rule does not have any ``tribal implications'' as
described in Executive Order 13175, entitled Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR 67249, November 6,
2000). Executive Order 13175, requires EPA to develop an accountable
process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in
the development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications.''
``Policies that have tribal implications'' is defined in the Executive
order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct effects on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and the Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Goverument and Indian tribes.''
This rule will not have substantial direct effects on tribal
governments, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified in
Executive Order 13175. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to
this rule.

VII. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this 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 this final rule in the Federal Register. This final
rule 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: December 12, 2006.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

0
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. Section 180.535 is amended by alphabetically adding commodities to
the table in paragraph (a) to read as follows:

Sec.  180.535  Fluroxypyr 1-methylheptyl ester; tolerances for
residues.

    (a) * * *

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

                                * * * * *
Garlic, bulb...............................................         0.03

                                * * * * *
Onion, bulb................................................         0.03
Shallot, bulb..............................................         0.03

                                * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 06-9765 Filed 12-19-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-M