[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 221 (Friday, November 15, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 62485-62488]
[FR Doc No: 2019-24532]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0865; Product Identifier 2019-NM-158-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for all Airbus SAS Model A350-941 and -1041 airplanes. This proposed AD
was prompted by reports of passenger door girt bar fitting assembly
safety hooks being stuck in the upward position. This proposed AD would
require repetitive detailed inspections of girt bar fitting assemblies,
repetitive greasing of girt bar fitting assembly bushes, and, depending

on findings, accomplishment of applicable corrective actions, as
specified in a European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD, which
will be incorporated by reference. The FAA is proposing this AD to
address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by December
30, 2019.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For the material identified in this proposed AD that will be
incorporated by reference (IBR), contact the EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer
3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 89990 1000; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this IBR
material on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view
this IBR material at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available in the AD
docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-0865.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-
0865; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this NPRM, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other
information. The street address for Docket Operations is listed above.
Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathleen Arrigotti, Aerospace
Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2019-0865;
Product Identifier 2019-NM-158-AD'' at the beginning of your comments.
The FAA specifically invites comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this NPRM. The FAA will
consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this
NPRM based on those comments.
    The FAA will post all comments received, without change, to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide.
The FAA will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal
contact received about this NPRM.

Discussion

    The EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2019-0207, dated August 22, 2019
(``EASA AD 2019-0207'') (also referred to as the Mandatory Continuing
Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe
condition for all Airbus SAS Model A350-941 and -1041 airplanes.
    This proposed AD was prompted by reports of passenger door girt bar
fitting assembly safety hooks being stuck in the upward position. The
FAA is proposing this AD to address this condition, which could lead to
girt bar disengagement from the girt bar fitting assembly and
consequent failure of the passenger door slide deployment during an
emergency, possibly preventing safe evacuation of the airplane. See the
MCAI for additional background information.

Related IBR Material Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2019-0207 describes procedures for repetitive detailed
inspections of girt bar fitting assemblies, repetitive greasing of girt
bar fitting assembly bushes, and, depending on findings, accomplishment
of applicable corrective actions. Corrective actions include rework and
replacement. EASA AD 2019-0207 also describes procedures for sending
inspection results to Airbus. This material is reasonably available
because the interested parties have access to it through their normal
course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to a bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, the FAA
has been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI
referenced above. The FAA is proposing this AD because the agency
evaluated all the relevant information and determined the unsafe
condition described previously is likely to exist or develop in other
products of the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in EASA AD 2019-0207 described previously, as incorporated by
reference, except for any differences identified as exceptions in the
regulatory text of this AD.

Explanation of Required Compliance Information

    In the FAA's ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the AD
process, the FAA initially worked with Airbus and EASA to develop a
process to use certain EASA ADs as the primary source of information
for compliance with requirements for corresponding FAA ADs. The FAA has
since coordinated with other manufacturers and civil aviation
authorities (CAAs) to use this process. As a result, EASA AD 2019-0207
will be incorporated by reference in the FAA final rule. This proposed
AD would, therefore, require compliance with EASA AD 2019-0207 in its
entirety, through that incorporation, except for any differences
identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this proposed AD.
Using common terms that are the same as the heading of a particular
section in the EASA AD does not mean that operators need comply only
with that section. For example, where the AD requirement refers to
``all required actions and compliance times,'' compliance with this AD
requirement is not limited to the section titled ``Required Action(s)
and Compliance Time(s)'' in the EASA AD. Service information specified
in EASA AD 2019-0207 that is required for compliance with EASA AD 2019-
0207 will be available on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov
by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-0865 after the FAA
final rule is published.

Interim Action

    The FAA considers this proposed AD interim action. If final action
is later identified, the FAA might consider further rulemaking then.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this proposed AD affects 13 airplanes of
U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with
this proposed AD:

                                     Estimated Costs for Required Actions *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
                          Labor cost                              Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 work-hour x $85 per hour = $85.............................              $0              $85           $1,105
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Table does not include estimated costs for reporting.

    The FAA estimates that it would take about 1 work-hour per product
to comply with the proposed reporting requirement in this proposed AD.
The average labor rate is $85 per hour. Based on these figures, the FAA
estimates the cost of reporting the inspection results on U.S.
operators to be $1,105, or $85 per product.
    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary on-
condition actions that would be required based on the results of any
required actions. The FAA has no way of determining the number of
aircraft that might need these on-condition actions:

                 Estimated Costs of On-Condition Actions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Labor cost                 Parts cost       Cost per product
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Up to 3 work-hours x $85 per                      *               *$255
 hour = $255....................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The FAA has received no definitive data that would enable the agency
  to provide parts cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified
  in this proposed AD.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to penalty for
failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of
information displays a current valid OMB control number. The control
number for the collection of information required by this NPRM is 2120-
0056. The paperwork cost associated with this NPRM has been detailed in
the Costs of Compliance section of this document and includes time for
reviewing instructions, as well as completing and reviewing the
collection of information. Therefore, all reporting associated with
this NPRM is mandatory. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or
any other aspect of this collection of information, including
suggestions for reducing this burden to: Information Collection
Clearance Officer, Federal Aviation Administration, 10101 Hillwood
Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177-1524.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.
    This proposed AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated
by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as
authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order,
issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and
Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the
Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable
to transport category airplanes and associated appliances to the
Director of the System Oversight Division.

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13   [Amended]

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

Airbus SAS: Docket No. FAA-2019-0865; Product Identifier 2019-NM-
158-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments by December 30, 2019.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Airbus SAS Model A350-941 and -1041
airplanes, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 52, Doors.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of passenger door girt bar
fitting assembly safety hooks being stuck in the upward position. We
are issuing this AD to address this condition, which could lead to
girt bar disengagement from the girt bar fitting assembly and
consequent failure of the passenger door slide deployment during an
emergency, possibly preventing safe evacuation of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Requirements

    Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD
2019-0207, dated August 22, 2019 (``EASA AD 2019-0207'').

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2019-0207

    (1) Where EASA AD 2019-0207 refers to its effective date, this
AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (2) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2019-0207 does not apply
to this AD.
    (3) Paragraph (4) of EASA AD 2019-0207 specifies to report
inspection results to Airbus within a certain compliance time. For
this AD, report inspection results at the applicable time specified
in paragraph (h)(3)(i) or (ii) of this AD.
    (i) If the inspection was done on or after the effective date of
this AD: Submit the report within 90 days after the inspection.
    (ii) If the inspection was done before the effective date of
this AD: Submit the report within 90 days after the effective date
of this AD.

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the International Section, send it to the attention of
the person identified in paragraph (j)(2) of this AD. Information
may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Before using any
approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or
lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight
standards district office/certificate holding district office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus SAS's
EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the
approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.
    (3) Required for Compliance (RC): For any service information
referenced in EASA AD 2019-0207 that contains RC procedures and
tests: Except as required by paragraph (i)(2) of this AD, RC
procedures and tests must be done to comply with this AD; any
procedures or tests that are not identified as RC are recommended.
Those procedures and tests that are not identified as RC may be
deviated from using accepted methods in accordance with the
operator's maintenance or inspection program without obtaining
approval of an AMOC, provided the procedures and tests identified as
RC can be done and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy
condition. Any substitutions or changes to procedures or tests
identified as RC require approval of an AMOC.
    (4) Paperwork Reduction Act Burden Statement: A federal agency
may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond
to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply
with a collection of information subject to the requirements of the
Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information
displays a current valid OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Number
for this information collection is 2120-0056. Public reporting for
this collection of information is estimated to be approximately 1
hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions,
completing and reviewing the collection of information. All
responses to this collection of information are mandatory. Send
comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this
collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this
burden to: Information Collection Clearance Officer, Federal
Aviation Administration, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX
76177-1524.

(j) Related Information

    (1) For information about EASA AD 2019-0207, contact the EASA,
Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221
89990 6017; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet www.easa.europa.eu.
You may find this EASA AD on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view this material at the FAA, Transport
Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
206-231-3195. This material may be found in the AD docket on the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2019-0865.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Kathleen
Arrigotti, Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport
Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198;
telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on November 1, 2019.
Dionne Palermo,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-24532 Filed 11-14-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 117 (Tuesday, June 20, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28223-28224]
[FR Doc No: 2017-12805]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

[Docket No. PHMSA-2016-0033]

Pipeline Safety: Gas and Liquid Advisory Committee Member
Nominations

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA),
DOT.

ACTION: Notice; request for nominations for members: Gas and Liquid
Pipeline Advisory Committees; vacancies.

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

SUMMARY: PHMSA is requesting nominations for individuals to serve on
the Gas Pipeline Advisory Committee (GPAC), also known as the Technical
Pipeline Safety Standards Committee, and the Liquid Pipeline Advisory
Committee (LPAC), also known as the Technical Hazardous Liquid Pipeline
Safety Standards Committee. Each committee is composed of 15 members
each appointed by the Secretary of Transportation (the Secretary).
    With this notice, PHMSA is seeking nominations for personnel,
preferably executive level leadership, from the Federal Government and
from industry to fill vacancies on both committees. Specifically, PHMSA
will fill one Federal Government vacancy and one industry vacancy on
the GPAC and one Federal Government vacancy and three industry
vacancies on the LPAC. PHMSA may also consider candidates for any
government or industry vacancies that may occur during the processing
of the vacancies mentioned above.

DATES: Nominations must be received by July 5, 2017.

ADDRESSES: All nomination material can be submitted to Cheryl Whetsel,
Advisory Committee Program Manager, at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>by fax
at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or mailed to the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE., PHP-30, E24-445,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cheryl Whetsel,<PHONE_NUMBER> or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Information about the GPAC and LPAC can also be
obtained by visiting PHMSA's Web site by using the following link:
http://www.phmsa.dot.gov/pipeline/regs/technical-advisory-comm.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Advisory Committee Background

    The GPAC and LPAC are statutorily mandated advisory committees that
provide recommendations and advice on PHMSA's proposed safety
standards. Additionally, the committees may propose safety standards to
the Secretary, and, if requested by the Secretary, shall make policy
development recommendations. Both committees were established in
accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. 2,
and 49 U.S.C. 60115.
    No later than 90 days after receiving a proposed standard and
supporting analyses, the appropriate committee prepares and submits a
report to the Secretary of Transportation on the technical feasibility,
reasonableness, cost-effectiveness, and practicability of the proposed
standard. The Secretary must publish each report, including any
recommended actions and minority views. The report, if timely made, is
part of the proceeding for prescribing the standard. The Secretary is
not bound by the committee's conclusions. However, if the Secretary
rejects the committee's conclusions, the Secretary must publish the
reasons.
    Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 60115, the Secretary of Transportation has
the authority to appoint to each committee (1) five individuals from
departments, agencies, and instrumentalities of the U.S. Government and
of the states; (2) five individuals from the natural gas or hazardous
liquid industry, selected in consultation with industry
representatives; and (3) five individuals selected from the general
public.

II. Criteria for Committee Members

    With this notice, PHMSA is seeking nominations for personnel,
preferably executive level leadership, from the Federal Government and
from industry to fill vacancies on both committees. PHMSA will fill one
Federal Government vacancy and one industry vacancy on the GPAC and one
Federal Government vacancy and two industry vacancies on the LPAC.
PHMSA may also consider candidates for any government or industry
vacancies that may occur during the processing of the vacancies
mentioned above.
    Each GPAC member selected by the Secretary of Transportation must
be experienced in the safety regulation of transporting gas and of gas
pipeline facilities or technically qualified, by training, experience,
or knowledge in at least one field of engineering applicable to
transporting gas or operating a gas pipeline facility, to evaluate gas
pipeline safety standards or risk management principles.
    Similarly, each LPAC member selected by the Secretary of
Transportation must be experienced in

the safety regulation of transporting hazardous liquid and of hazardous
liquid pipeline facilities or technically qualified by training,
experience, or knowledge in at least one field of engineering
applicable to transporting hazardous liquid or operating a hazardous
liquid pipeline facility, to evaluate hazardous liquid pipeline safety
standards or risk management principles.
    Regarding nominations of industry personnel, at least three of the
individuals selected for each committee from the industry must be
currently in the active operation of natural gas or hazardous liquid
pipelines or pipeline facilities. At least one individual selected for
each committee serving from the industry must have education,
background, or experience in risk assessment and cost-benefit analysis.
Nominees should represent a broad constituency whose views the
candidate can represent. Additionally, the Secretary will consult with
the national organizations representing the owners and operators of
pipeline facilities before selecting individuals from the industry.

III. Terms of Service

     Each member serves a three-year term, unless the member
becomes unable to serve, resigns, ceases to be qualified to serve, or
is removed by the Secretary.
     Members may be reappointed.
     All members serve at their own expense and receive no
salary from the Federal Government, although travel reimbursement and
per diem may be provided.
     The GPAC and LPAC generally meet in-person in the
Washington, DC, Metropolitan area.

IV. Nomination Procedures

    Any interested person may nominate one or more qualified
individuals for membership on the advisory committee. Self-nominations
are also accepted.
     Nominations must include a current, complete
r[eacute]sum[eacute] including current business address and/or home
address, telephone number, email address, education, professional or
business experience, present occupation, and membership on other
advisory committees past or present) for each nominee.
     Each nominee must meet the training, education, or
experience requirements listed under section II above.
     Nominations must also specify the advisory committee for
which the nominee is recommended (the GPAC or LPAC).
     Nominations must also acknowledge that the nominee is
aware of the nomination unless the individual is self-nominated.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on June 15, 2017, under authority
delegated in 49 CFR 1.97.
Alan K. Mayberry,
Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety.
[FR Doc. 2017-12805 Filed 6-19-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-60-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 61 (Monday, March 31, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18098-18099]
[FR Doc No: 2014-07036]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-71791; File No. SR-ICEEU-2014-02]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Europe Limited; Order
Approving Proposed Rule Change Regarding New Permitted Cover

March 25, 2014.

I. Introduction

    On February 4, 2014, ICE Clear Europe Limited (``ICE Clear
Europe'')

filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change SR-ICEEU-2014-02 pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder.\2\ The proposed rule change was published for comment in
the Federal Register on February 18, 2014.\3\ The Commission received
no comment letters regarding the proposed changes. For the reasons
discussed below, the Commission is granting approval of the proposed
rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-71519 (February 11,
2014), 79 FR 9296 (February 18, 2014) (SR-ICEEU-2014-02).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description

    ICE Clear Europe is proposing to permit Clearing Members of ICE
Clear Europe to post certain KfW Euro Benchmark Bonds (``KfWs'') and
European Investment Bank Euro Area Reference Notes (``EIBs'', together
with KfWs, the ``New Permitted Cover'') to ICE Clear Europe in order to
meet initial margin, original margin and certain other margin
requirements, including delivery margin requirements. The New Permitted
Cover will not be accepted to satisfy variation margin requirements or
guaranty fund requirements.
    ICE Clear Europe has stated that the New Permitted Cover will
provide its Clearing Members with a greater range of high-quality
collateral that can be posted to ICE Clear Europe. Furthermore, ICE
Clear Europe has stated that (1) the New Permitted Cover is of minimal
credit risk comparable to that of other sovereign debt currently
accepted by ICE Clear Europe as permitted cover for margin obligations,
and (2) the New Permitted Cover has demonstrated low volatility in
stressed and normal market conditions.
    ICE Clear Europe has established initial valuation haircut levels
and concentration limitations for the New Permitted Cover, and proposes
to review and modify such haircuts and limitations from time to time in
accordance with the Rules and procedures.
    The New Permitted Cover may only constitute up to 25% of a Clearing
Member's total initial and original margin requirement, up to a maximum
amount of EUR 30 million. The New Permitted Cover will be subject to a
valuation haircut of 3%, except that New Permitted Cover with a
maturity of more than eleven years will be subject to a valuation
haircut of 5%. The concentration limitations apply on an aggregate
basis across all product categories. Upon a Clearing Member's use of
New Permitted Cover to cover a margin requirement denominated in a
different currency, ICE Clear Europe has stated than an additional
haircut will apply, in accordance with existing rules, in order to
cover exchange rate risk.

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    Section 19(b)(2)(C) of the Act \4\ directs the Commission to
approve a proposed rule change of a self-regulatory organization if the
Commission finds that such proposed rule change is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder
applicable to such self-regulatory organization. Section 17A(b)(3)(F)
of the Act \5\ requires, among other things, that the rules of a
clearing agency are designed to promote the prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of securities transactions and, to the extent
applicable, derivative agreements, contracts, and transactions, to
assure the safeguarding of securities and funds which are in the
custody or control of the clearing agency and for which it is
responsible and, in general, to protect investors and the public
interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C).
    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the requirements of Section 17A of the Act,\6\ as Clearing Members
of ICE Clear Europe will have access to a greater range of collateral
that ICE Clear Europe has determined to be of high quality to satisfy
certain margin requirements, and the New Permitted Cover will be
subject to appropriate valuation haircuts and concentration limits,
which will be reviewed and modified periodically by ICE Clear Europe in
accordance with its Rules and procedures. The proposed rule changes
will thereby (1) promote the prompt and accurate clearance and
settlement of securities transactions and, to the extent applicable,
derivatives agreements, contracts, and transactions; and (2) help to
protect investors and the public interest, consistent with the
requirements of Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the
proposal is consistent with the requirements of the Act and in
particular with the requirements of Section 17A of the Act \8\ and the
rules and regulations thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\9\ that the proposed rule change (File No. SR-ICEEU-2014-02) be,
and hereby is, approved.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \10\ In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission
considered the proposal's impact on efficiency, competition and
capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \11\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\11\
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-07036 Filed 3-28-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 120 (Thursday, June 21, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28843-28844]
[FR Doc No: 2018-13325]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0566; FRL-9979-72-OAR]
RIN 2060-AT68

Public Hearing for and Extension of Comment Period on Review of
the Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard for Sulfur Oxides

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of public hearing and extension of public comment
period.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is announcing that a
public hearing will be held on the EPA's proposed decision in its
``Review of the Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard for
Sulfur Oxides,'' which was published in the Federal Register on June 8,
2018 (83 FR 26752). The EPA is proposing to retain the existing
standard without revision. The hearing will be held on Tuesday, July
10, 2018, in Washington, DC. The EPA is additionally announcing a 17-
day extension of the comment period for this proposed decision. The
original comment period was to end on July 23, 2018. The extended
comment period will now close on August 9, 2018.

DATES: The public hearing will be held on July 10, 2018, in Washington,
DC (see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for additional information on the
public hearing). The comment period on the proposed decision announced
in the Federal Register on June 8, 2018 (83 FR 26752), is extended.
Comments must be received on or before August 9, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Public Hearing. The July 10, 2018, public hearing will be
held at the EPA, William Jefferson Clinton East Building, Room 1117,
1201 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20004. Identification is
required. If your driver's license is issued by America Samoa, you must
present an additional form of identification to enter (see
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for additional information on this location).
Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0566,
to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the online instructions for submitting

comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or withdrawn. The
EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not
submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must
be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered
the official comment and should include discussion of all points you
wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the Web,
Cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission
methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or
multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective
comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the https://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA Docket Center
Reading Room, William Jefferson Clinton West Building, 1301
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20004. The Public Reading Room
is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The phone number for the Public Reading Room is (202)
566-1744.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you would like to speak at the
public hearing, please register using the online registration form
available at: https://www.epa.gov/so2-pollution/primary-national-ambient-air-quality-standard-naaqs-sulfur-dioxide or contact Ms. Regina
Chappell, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards (OAQPS) (Mail Code C304-03), Research Triangle
Park, NC 27711, telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number (919) 541-
0942; email: [email protected], no later than 4:00 p.m. Eastern
Time (ET) on July 6, 2018. If you have any questions relating to the
public hearing, please contact Ms. Chappell.
    For further information concerning the review of the primary
national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) for sulfur oxides, please
contact Dr. Nicole Hagan, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, OAQPS
(Mail Code C504-06), Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The EPA is reviewing the primary NAAQS for
sulfur oxides as required under section 109 (42 U.S.C. 7409) of the
Clean Air Act (CAA). The EPA's proposed decision to retain the current
primary NAAQS for sulfur oxides without revision was published in the
Federal Register on June 8, 2018 (83 FR 26752). The Federal Register
notice of the proposed decision specified a 45-day public comment
period and indicated that a public hearing would be held during the
public comment period if one was requested by June 15, 2018. On June 8,
we received a request for a public hearing. In keeping with the
schedule of this NAAQS review, which is governed by a consent decree,
the date for the public hearing will be July 10, 2018. Further,
consistent with CAA section 307(d)(5) (42 U.S.C. 7607(d)(5)), this
notice additionally extends the public comment period by 17 days, until
August 9, 2018.
    The public hearing will provide interested parties the opportunity
to present data, views, or arguments concerning the EPA's proposed
decision in the current review of the primary NAAQS for sulfur oxides.
The EPA may ask clarifying questions during the oral presentations, but
will not respond to the presentations at that time. If you would like
to present oral testimony at the hearing, please register using the
online registration form available at: https://www.epa.gov/so2-pollution/primary-national-ambient-air-quality-standard-naaqs-sulfur-dioxide or notify Ms. Regina Chappell, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, OAQPS (Mail Code C304-03), Research Triangle Park, NC 27711,
telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
[email protected], no later than 4:00 p.m. ET on July 6, 2018.
Ms. Chappell will arrange a general time slot for you to speak. The EPA
will make every effort to follow the schedule as closely as possible on
the day of the hearing. Oral testimony will be limited to 5 minutes for
each commenter. The EPA encourages commenters to provide the EPA with a
copy of their oral testimony electronically (via email) or in hard copy
form. Commenters should notify Ms. Chappell if they need specific
translation services for non-English speaking commenters.
    The public hearing will convene at 9:00 a.m. and end at 6:00 p.m.
ET or 2 hours after the last registered speaker has spoken, whichever
is earlier. The EPA will make every effort to accommodate all
individuals interested in providing oral testimony. A lunch break is
scheduled from 12:00 p.m. until 1:00 p.m. The hearing schedule,
including the list of speakers, will be posted on the EPA's website at
https://www.epa.gov/so2-pollution/primary-national-ambient-air-quality-standard-naaqs-sulfur-dioxide prior to the hearing. Verbatim
transcripts of the hearing and written statements will be included in
the docket for the action.
    This hearing will be held at a U.S. government facility.
Individuals planning to attend the hearing should be prepared to show
valid picture identification, such as a driver's license, to the
security staff in order to gain access to the meeting room. However,
driver's licenses from states and territories that do not comply with
the REAL ID Act will not be accepted as identification. The REAL ID
Act, passed by Congress in 2005, established new requirements for
entering federal facilities. These requirements took effect on July 21,
2014. If your driver's license is issued by American Samoa, you must
present an alternative form of identification to enter the federal
building where the public hearing will be held. Acceptable alternative
forms of identification include: Federal employee badges, passports,
enhanced driver's licenses and military identification cards. For
additional information for the status of your state regarding the REAL
ID Act, go to https://www.dhs.gov/real-id-enforcement-brief. For
additional information on building access and alternative forms of
identification, go to https://www.epa.gov/aboutepa/visiting-epa-headquarters.

How can I get copies of this document and other related information?

    The EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0566 (available at https://www.regulations.gov).
The EPA has also made available information related to the proposed
action on the following website: https://www.epa.gov/so2-pollution/primary-national-ambient-air-quality-standard-naaqs-sulfur-dioxide.

    Dated: June 15, 2018.
Panagiotis Tsirigotis,
Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.
[FR Doc. 2018-13325 Filed 6-20-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: July 31, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 148)]
[Notices]
[Page 44774-44775]
[DOCID:fr31jy08-75]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2008-0015]

Cotton Dust Standard; Extension of the Office of Management and
Budget's (OMB) Approval of Information Collection (Paperwork)
Requirements

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: OSHA solicits public comment concerning its proposal to extend
OMB approval of the information collection requirements specified by
the Cotton Dust Standard (29 CFR 1910.1043).

DATES: Comments must be submitted (postmarked, sent, or received) by
September 29, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Electronically: You may submit comments and attachments
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal. Follow the instructions online for submitting
comments.
    Facsimile: If your comments, including attachments, are not longer
than 10 pages, you may fax them to the OSHA Docket Office at (202) 693-
1648.
    Mail, hand delivery, express mail, messenger, or courier service:
When using this method, you must submit three copies of your comments
and attachments to the OSHA Docket Office, Docket No. OSHA-2008-0015,
U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health
Administration, Room N-2625, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington,
DC 20210. Deliveries (hand, express mail, messenger, and courier
service) are accepted during the Department of Labor's and Docket
Office's normal business hours, 8:15 a.m. to 4:45 p.m., e.t.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency name and OSHA
docket number for the Information Collection Request (ICR) (OSHA-2008-
0015). All comments, including any personal information you provide,
are placed in the public docket without change, and may be made
available online at http://www.regulations.gov. For further information
on submitting comments see the ``Public Participation'' heading in the
section of this notice titled SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
    Docket: To read or download comments or other material in the
docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov or the OSHA Docket Office at
the address above. All documents in the docket (including this Federal
Register notice) are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index;
however, some information (e.g., copyrighted material) is not publicly
available to read or download through the Web site. All submissions,
including copyrighted material, are available for inspection and
copying at the OSHA Docket Office. You may also contact Todd Owen at
the address below to obtain a copy of the ICR.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Todd Owen, Directorate of Standards
and Guidance, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N-3609, 200
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202) 693-
2222.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Department of Labor, as part of its continuing effort to reduce
paperwork and respondent (i.e., employer) burden, conducts a
preclearance consultation program to provide the public with an
opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing information
collection requirements in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (PRA-95) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)).
    This program ensures that information is in the desired format,
reporting burden (time and costs) is minimal, collection instruments
are clearly understood, and OSHA's estimate of the information
collection burden is accurate. The Occupational Safety and Health Act
of 1970 (the Act) (29 U.S.C. 651 et seq.) authorizes information
collection by employers as necessary or appropriate for enforcement of
the Act or for developing information regarding the causes and
prevention of occupational injuries, illnesses, and accidents (29
U.S.C. 657). The Act also requires that OSHA obtain such information
with minimum burden upon employers, especially those operating small
businesses, and to reduce to the maximum extent feasible unnecessary
duplication of efforts in obtaining information (29 U.S.C. 657).
    The information collection requirements specified in the Cotton
Dust Standard protect employees from the adverse health effects that
may result from their exposure to cotton dust. The major information
collection requirements of the Cotton Dust Standard include: performing
exposure monitoring, including initial, periodic, and additional
monitoring; notifying each employee of their exposure monitoring
results either in writing or by posting; implementing a written
compliance program; and establishing a respiratory protection program
in accordance with OSHA's Respiratory Protection Standard (29 CFR
1910.134).

II. Special Issues for Comment

    OSHA has a particular interest in comments on the following issues:
     Whether the proposed information collection requirements
are necessary for the proper performance of the Agency's functions,
including whether the information is useful;
     The accuracy of OSHA's estimate of the burden (time and
costs) of the information collection requirements, including the
validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
     The quality, utility, and clarity of the information
collected; and
     Ways to minimize the burden on employers who must comply;
for example, by using automated or other technological information
collection and transmission techniques.

III. Proposed Actions

    OSHA proposes to extend the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB)
approval of these collection of information (paperwork) requirements
specified in the Cotton Dust Standard (29 CFR 1910.1043). The Agency is
requesting to decrease its current burden hour total from 70,340 hours
to 35,742 for a total decrease of 34,598 hours. The adjustment is
primarily the result of the Agency decreasing the number of
establishments from 535 to 384. As a result of the number of
establishments decreasing, there was also a significant reduction in
the number of exposed employees from 49,628 to 25,457. The Agency will
summarize the comments submitted in response to this notice, and will
include this summary in the request to OMB to extend the approval of
the information collection requirements contained in the Standard.
    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.
    Title: Cotton Dust Standard (29 CFR 1910.1043).
    OMB Number: 1218-0061.

    Affected Public: Business or other for-profits; Federal Government;
State, Local or Tribal Government.
    Frequency: On occasion.
    Average Time per Response: Varies from 5 minutes (.08 hour) for a
secretary to maintain a record to 4 hours to complete a medical
examination.
    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 35,742.
    Estimated Cost (Operation and Maintenance): $3,519,531.

IV. Public Participation--Submission of Comments on This Notice and
Internet Access to Comments and Submissions

    You may submit comments in response to this document as follows:
(1) Electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal; (2) by facsimile (FAX); or (3) by hard copy. All
comments, attachments, and other material must identify the Agency name
and the OSHA docket number for the ICR (Docket No. OSHA-2008-0015). You
may supplement electronic submissions by uploading document files
electronically. If you wish to mail additional materials in reference
to an electronic or facsimile submission, you must submit them to the
OSHA Docket Office (see the section of this notice titled ADDRESSES).
The additional materials must clearly identify your electronic comments
by your name, date, and the docket number so the Agency can attach them
to your comments.
    Because of security procedures, the use of regular mail may cause a
significant delay in the receipt of comments. For information about
security procedures concerning the delivery of materials by hand,
express delivery, messenger, or courier service, please contact the
OSHA Docket Office at<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>).
    Comments and submissions are posted without change at http://
www.regulations.gov. Therefore, OSHA cautions commenters about
submitting personal information such as social security numbers and
date of birth. Although all submissions are listed in the http://
www.regulations.gov index, some information (e.g., copyrighted
material) is not publicly available to read or download through this
Web site. All submissions, including copyrighted material, are
available for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office.
Information on using the http://www.regulations.gov Web site to submit
comments and access the docket is available at the Web site's ``User
Tips'' link. Contact the OSHA Docket Office for information about
materials not available through the Web site, and for assistance in
using the Internet to locate docket submissions.

V. Authority and Signature

    Edwin G. Foulke, Jr., Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational
Safety and Health, directed the preparation of this notice. The
authority for this notice is the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3506 et seq.) and Secretary of Labor's Order No. 5-2007 (72 FR
31159).

    Signed at Washington, DC, on July 25, 2008.
Edwin G. Foulke, Jr.,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. E8-17536 Filed 7-30-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 202 (Wednesday, October 19, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 72129-72131]
[FR Doc No: 2016-25234]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-79094; File No. SR-OCC-2016-009]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Options Clearing Corporation;
Order Approving Proposed Rule Change Concerning the Options Clearing
Corporation's Escrow Deposit Program

October 13, 2016.
    On August 15, 2016, The Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change SR-OCC-2016-009 pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange Act'') \1\ and Rule
19b-4 thereunder.\2\ The proposed rule change was published for comment
in the Federal Register on August 31, 2016.\3\ The Commission did not
receive any comments on the proposed rule change. This order approves
the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 78675 (August 25, 2016),
81 FR 60099 (August 31, 2016) (SR-OCC-2016-009) (``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Description of the Proposed Rule Change

A. Background

    OCC is the sole clearing agency for the U.S. listed options markets
and a systemically important financial market utility. In this role,
OCC seeks to manage risks that could cause a financial loss or
settlement disruption and, therefore, threaten the stability of the
U.S. financial system, by collecting collateral to protect against
potential losses stemming from the default of a clearing member or its
customers through margin from its clearing members or from deposits in
lieu of margin of clearing members' customers through OCC's escrow
deposit program.
    According to OCC, users of its escrow deposit program are customers
of clearing members who, through the escrow deposit program, are
permitted to collateralize eligible positions directly with OCC
(instead of with the relevant clearing member who will, in turn,
deposit margin at OCC). When a customer of a clearing member makes a
deposit in lieu of margin through OCC's escrow deposit program, the
relevant positions are excluded from the clearing member's margin
requirement at OCC. OCC states that the escrow deposit program
therefore provides users of OCC's services with a means to more
efficiently use cash or securities they may have available.

B. The Proposed Rule Change

    The proposed rule change seeks to improve the resiliency of OCC's
escrow deposit program by effecting the following changes. First, The
proposed rule change would increase OCC's visibility into and control
over collateral deposits made under the escrow deposit program. As
described in the Notice, securities deposits in the escrow deposit
program (``specific deposits'') are currently held at either the
Depository Trust Company (``DTC'') or custodian banks, and cash
deposits in the escrow deposit program (``escrow deposits'') are held
at custodian banks. While OCC currently can verify the value of the
securities deposited at DTC through DTC's systems, it lacks similar
visibility into cash and securities held in custodian bank accounts,
relying instead on the custodian banks to verify the value of such
collateral. The proposed changes require securities in the escrow
deposit program to be held at DTC, providing OCC with increased
visibility into the collateral, as OCC will be able to view, validate,
and value the collateral in real time and perform the controls
currently performed by custodian banks. As stated in the Notice, banks
participating in the escrow deposit program (``Tri-Party Custodian
Banks'') will also provide OCC with online view access to each
customer's cash account designated for the escrow deposit program,
allowing visibility into transactional activity and account balances
without having to rely upon a third party to value or validate the
existence of the collateral.
    Second, the proposed changes will provide more specificity
concerning the manner in which OCC will take possession of collateral
in OCC's escrow deposit program in the event of a clearing member or
custodian bank default. As described in the Notice, proposed Rules
610A(b), 610B(f), 610C(q), and 610C(r) will provide that in the event
of a clearing member or custodian bank default, OCC will have the right
to direct DTC to deliver the securities included in a member specific
deposit, third-party specific deposit or escrow deposit to OCC's DTC
participant account for the purpose of satisfying the obligations of
the clearing member or reimbursing itself for losses incurred as a
result of the failure. Similarly, proposed Rules 610C(q) and 610C(r)
will give OCC the right in the event of a Tri-Party Custodian Bank
default to take possession of cash included within an escrow deposit
for the same purposes. Further, Rule 1106(b)(2) will be amended to
provide that OCC may close out a short position of a suspended clearing
member covered by a member specific, third-party specific or escrow
deposit, subject to the ability of the suspended clearing member or its
representative to transfer the short position to another clearing
member under certain circumstances.
    Third, the proposed changes will clarify clearing members' rights
to collateral in the escrow deposit program in the event of a customer
default to the clearing member. According to the Notice, Proposed Rules
610B(c) and 610C(f) will provide for the grant of a security interest
by the customer to the clearing member with respect to any given third-
party specific deposit and escrow deposit, as applicable, with the
clearing member's right subordinate to OCC's interest. Proposed Rules
610C(d), 610C(o), 610C(p) and 610C(s), relating to escrow deposits, and
proposed Rules 610B(d) and 610B(e), relating to third-party specific
deposits, will provide that, in the event of a customer default to a
clearing member, the clearing member will have the right to request a
``hold'' on a deposit, which will prevent the withdrawal of deposited
securities or cash by a custodian bank or the release of a deposit that
will otherwise occur in the ordinary course. OCC states that placing
the ``hold'' instruction gives a clearing member the right to request
that OCC direct delivery of the deposit to the clearing member through
DTC's systems, in the case of securities, or an instruction to the Tri-
Party Custodian Bank in the case of cash. OCC believes that providing
clearing members with transparent instructions regarding how to place a
hold instruction on and direct delivery of a deposit in the escrow
deposit program will be a significant enhancement to the current escrow
deposit program.
    Fourth, the proposed changes will improve the readability of the
rules governing OCC's escrow deposit program by consolidating all such
rules into a single location in OCC's Rulebook. Upon implementation of
the proposed changes, all securities collateral in OCC's escrow deposit
program will be held at DTC, and custodian banks will only be allowed
to hold cash collateral.
    Fifth, the proposed rule change will consolidate all of the rules
concerning the escrow deposit program, including the provisions of the
Escrow Deposit Agreement (``EDA''), which also contains substantive
provisions governing the program, into Rules 610, 610A, 610B and 610C.
OCC believes that consolidating the many rules governing the escrow
deposit program into a single

location will significantly enhance the understandability and
transparency of the rules concerning the escrow deposit program for
current users of the program as well as any persons that may be
interested in using the program in the future. As part of the
consolidation efforts, the proposed rule change would also rename
certain existing terminologies used in the escrow deposit program.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Notice, supra note 3, 81 FR at 60100.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, OCC will eliminate the EDA and replace it with a
streamlined agreement entitled the ``Participating Escrow Bank
Agreement.'' The Participating Escrow Bank Agreement will provide that
custodian banks are subject to all terms of the rules governing the
revised escrow deposit program, as they may be amended from time to
time.\5\ The Participating Escrow Bank Agreement will contain
eligibility requirements for custodian banks, including representations
regarding the custodian bank's Tier 1 Capital, and provide OCC with
express representations concerning the bank's authority to enter into
the Participating Escrow Bank Agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Under the Participating Escrow Bank Agreement, however, OCC
will agree to provide custodian banks with advance notice of
material amendments to the rules relating to deposits in lieu of
margin and custodian banks will have the opportunity to withdraw
from the escrow deposit program if they object to the amendments.
OCC states that, as a general matter, the Participating Escrow Bank
Agreement will not be negotiable, although OCC may determine to vary
certain non-material terms in limited circumstances.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, Proposed Rule 610C(b) will require customers wishing
to deposit cash collateral and custodian banks holding escrow deposits
comprised of cash to enter into a tri-party agreement involving OCC,
the customer and the applicable custodian bank. While cash collateral
pledged in the escrow deposit program will continue to be facilitated
through existing interfaces, OCC states that pledges will be required
to be made in the customer's account at the Tri-Party Custodian Bank.
OCC states that the Tri-Party Agreement will govern the customer's use
of cash in the program, confirm the grant of a security interest in the
customer's account to OCC and the relevant clearing member (as set
forth in proposed Rule 610C(f)), and cause customers of clearing
members to be subject to all terms of the Rules governing the revised
escrow deposit program. Each custodian bank entering into the Tri-Party
Agreement will also agree to follow the directions of OCC with respect
to cash escrow deposits without further consent by the customer.

II. Discussion and Commission Findings

    Exchange Act Section 19(b)(2)(C) \6\ directs the Commission to
approve a proposed rule change of a self-regulatory organization if it
finds that the rule change, as proposed, is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder
applicable to such organization.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Exchange Act, which requires, among
other things, that the rules of a clearing agency assure the
safeguarding of securities and funds that are in the custody or control
of the clearing agency or for which it is responsible.\7\ As described
above, the proposed rule change will enhance OCC's ability to validate
and value escrow deposit program deposits in real time and enhance its
ability to expeditiously take possession of such deposits in the event
of a default. These enhancements will enable OCC to better ensure that
it monitors and maintains adequate financial resources in the event of
a clearing member default and thereby assure the safeguarding of
securities and funds in OCC's custody or control or for which it is
responsible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is
consistent with Exchange Act Rules 17Ad-22(d)(1), (3), and (11).
Exchange Act Rule 17Ad-22(d)(1) requires clearing agencies to
establish, implement, maintain and enforce written policies and
procedures reasonably designed to provide a well-founded, transparent,
and enforceable legal framework for each aspect of its activities in
all relevant jurisdictions.\8\ Through the proposed change, OCC will
provide clarity to clearing members, their customers, and potential
users of OCC's escrow deposit program regarding the operations of the
escrow deposit program and the rights of OCC, clearing members and
customers upon a clearing member or customer default. For example, the
proposed change will better codify OCC's and clearing members' rights
to collateral in the escrow deposit program the event of a clearing
member or customer default and provide greater transparency regarding
the operational steps involved in taking possession of such collateral.
Moreover, consolidating the rules governing the escrow deposit program
and terms previously located in the EDA into a single location will
enhance the transparency of the applicable rules. As such, the
Commission believes the proposed change is consistent with Exchange Act
Rule 17Ad-22(d)(1).\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(d)(1).
    \9\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the Commission believes that the proposed change is
consistent with Exchange Act Rule 17Ad-22(d)(3), which requires
clearing agencies to, among other things, establish, implement,
maintain and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably
designed to hold assets in a manner that minimizes risk of loss or
delay in its access to them.\10\ As described above, all non-cash
collateral in the escrow deposit program will be held at DTC, allowing
OCC to validate and value collateral in real time and quickly obtain
possession of deposited securities in an event of default without
involving custodian banks by issuing a transfer instruction through
DTC's systems. The proposed change will also codify OCC's right to take
possession of cash collateral within an escrow account upon a clearing
member or custodian bank default and provide OCC with online view
access to each customer's cash account at the custodian bank. Together,
these changes will allow OCC to monitor the adequacy of collateral in
the escrow deposit program and be able to more quickly take possession
of such collateral in the event of a clearing member default, which
will, thereby, reduce potential losses to OCC, other clearing members
and market participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(d)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Commission believes that the proposed change is
consistent with Exchange Act Rule 17Ad-22(d)(11), which requires
clearing agencies to, among other things, establish, implement,
maintain and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably
designed to make key aspects of their default procedures publicly
available.\11\ The Commission believes that the proposed change is
consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(d)(11) because it will incorporate the
substantive terms of the escrow deposit program, and specifically the
rules concerning default management, into OCC's Rules, which are
publicly available on OCC's Web site, rather than in private
agreements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(d)(11).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Conclusion

    On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the
proposal is consistent with the requirements of the Act, and in
particular, with the requirements of Section 17A of the

Act \12\ and the rules and regulations thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Exchange Act,\13\ that the proposed rule change (SR-OCC-2016-009) be,
and it hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-25234 Filed 10-18-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 163 (Thursday, August 24, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 57891-57894]
[FR Doc No: 2023-18222]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2022-0577; FRL-11274-01-OCSPP]

Imazapyr; Pesticide Tolerances

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
imazapyr in or on rice, bran and rice, grain. BASF Corporation
requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FFDCA).

DATES: This regulation is effective August 24, 2023. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before October 23, 2023,
and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40
CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2022-0577, is available at
https://www.regulations.gov or in-person at the Office of Pesticide
Programs Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental
Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson
Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460-0001. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone
number for the Public Reading Room and the OPP Docket is (202) 566-
1744. Please review the visitor instructions and additional information
about the docket available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles Smith, Director, Registration
Division (7505T), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

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

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

    You may access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA's
tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Federal Register
Office's e-CFR site at https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-40.

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

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2022-0577 in the subject line on the first
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must
be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before
October 23, 2023. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections
and hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for
inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without
prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing
request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2022-0577, by one of
the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at https://www.epa.gov/dockets/where-send-comments-epa-dockets.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance

    In the Federal Register of September 23, 2022 (87 FR 58047) (FRL-
9410-05-OCSPP), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section
408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide
petition (PP 2E9009) by BASF Corporation, 26 Davis Drive, Research
Triangle Park, NC 27709-3528. The petition requested that 40 CFR
180.500 be amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the
herbicide imazapyr, (2-[4,5-dihydro- 4-methyl-4-(1-methylethyl)-5-oxo-
1H-imidazol-2- yl]-3-pyridinecarboxylic acid), in or on rice, bran at
0.2 parts per million (ppm) and rice, grain at 0.06 ppm. That document
referenced a summary of the petition prepared by BASF Corporation, the
registrant, which is available in the docket, https://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received in response to the
notice of filing.
    Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA is
establishing one tolerance at a different level than requested by the
registrant. The reason for these changes are explained in Unit IV.C.

III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

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

A. Toxicological Profile

    EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children.
    No hazard was identified for imazapyr in the toxicity database,
i.e., no toxicity was demonstrated in acceptable guideline studies
generally up to the highest doses tested of 250-1,000 mg/kg/day. The
data also show that there is no evidence of neurotoxicity,
immunotoxicity, genotoxicity, or carcinogenicity. Further, no adverse
developmental effects or adverse reproductive effects were detected in
well-conducted guideline studies. Therefore, EPA concluded that
dietary, occupational, and residential exposures to imazapyr do not
pose a significant human health risk. Although there is potential for
exposure to imazapyr, no hazard was identified from the well-conducted
toxicity studies. No adverse effects were observed in the submitted
toxicological studies regardless of the route of exposure or the
species tested. Therefore, risk assessments are not required.
Furthermore, the toxicology database is considered to be adequate, and
no additional studies are required.
    Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by imazapyr 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 https://www.regulations.gov in document titled ``Imazapyr Human Health Risks
Assessment for the Establishment of Permanent Tolerances for Residues
in/on Rice'' (hereinafter ``Imazapyr Human Health Risk Assessment'') on
pages 12-15 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2022-0577.

B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern

    Once a pesticide's toxicological profile is determined, EPA
identifies toxicological points of departure (POD) and levels of
concern to use in evaluating the risk posed by human exposure to the
pesticide. For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, the toxicological POD is used as the basis for
derivation of reference values for risk assessment.

PODs are developed based on a careful analysis of the doses in each
toxicological study to determine the the NOAEL and the the LOAEL.
Uncertainty/safety factors are used in conjunction with the POD to
calculate a safe exposure level--generally referred to as a population-
adjusted dose (PAD) or a reference dose (RfD)--and a safe margin of
exposure (MOE). For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes that any
amount of exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the Agency
estimates risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of the
adverse effect expected in a lifetime. For more information on the
general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete
description of the risk assessment process, see https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/assessing-human-health-risk-pesticides.
    Since no effects were seen in any guideline toxicity studies at
doses relevant for human health risk assessment, no toxicological
points of departure (PODs) were selected for imazapyr.

C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to imazapyr, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-for
tolerances as well as all existing imazapyr tolerances in 40 CFR
180.500. There is likely to be dietary exposure to imazapyr from its
registered uses as a pesticide on domestic crops. Should exposure
occur, however, minimal to no risk is expected for the general U.S
population, including infants and children, due to the low toxicity of
imazapyr.
    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. While there is no
additional exposure expected from imazapyr tolerances for rice because
it is for import only, there is likely to be dietary exposure to
imazapyr in drinking water from its registered uses as a pesticide on
domestic crops. Should exposure occur, however, minimal to no risk is
expected for the general U.S population, including infants and
children, due to the low toxicity of imazapyr.
    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).
    Imazapyr is currently registered in the United States for
application in/around the home (homeowner application permitted) and to
noncropland areas, aquatic sites, grasslands, and imidazolinone-
tolerant field corn. Due to the low toxicity of imazapyr, quantitative
exposure assessments are not required. Residential exposure to imazapyr
is not expected to increase with this tolerance because these
tolerances are for import only. EPA concludes with reasonable certainty
that non-occupational exposures to imazapyr do not pose a significant
human health risk.
    4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.'' 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 imazapyr and any other substances. For the purposes of
this action, therefore, EPA has not assumed that imazapyr has a common
mechanism of toxicity with other substances. Further information
regarding EPA Pesticide Commulative Risk Assessment can be found at
https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/pesticide-cumulative-risk-assessment-framework.

D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

    1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the Food Quality
Protection Agency Safety Factor (SF). In applying this provision, EPA
either retains the default value of 10X, or uses a different additional
safety factor when reliable data available to EPA support the choice of
a different factor.
    2. Conclusion. No hazard was identified from the toxicity studies.
No adverse effects were observed in the submitted toxicological studies
regardless of the route of exposure or the species tested. The
toxicology database for imazapyr is considered to be adequate. No
additional toxicological studies are required, and no additional safety
factors to protect children are needed and EPA is not retaining the 10X
safety factor.

E. Determination of Safety

    Taking into account the available data for imazapyr, EPA has
concluded that given the lack of toxicity of this substance, no risks
of concern are expected. Therefore, EPA concludes that there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the general
population, or to infants and children, from aggregate exposure to
imazapyr.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    Adequate enforcement methodology (high-performance liquid
chromatography with tandem mass spectroscopy (LC/MS/MS), method SOP-
PA.0288) is available for tolerance enforcement.
    The method may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry
Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD
20755-5350; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
[email protected].

B. International Residue Limits

    In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4).
    The Codex has not established a MRL for imazapyr in or on rice.

C. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances

    EPA is establishing the tolerance for rice, bran at 0.15 ppm rather
than at 0.2 ppm as requested by the petitioner. The rice, bran
tolerance is based on the highest average field trial residue (0.031
ppm) and the median rice bran processing factor of 3.2x. (0.031 ppm x
3.2 = 0.099 ppm). The tolerance is being established at 0.15 ppm
because that is the rounding class after 0.1 ppm. For the rice grain
tolerance of 0.06 ppm, EPA used the Organization for Economic Co-
operation and Development (OECD) maximum residue limit (MRL)
calculation procedures.

V. Conclusion

    Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of imazapyr (2-
[4,5-dihydro-4-methyl-4-(1-methylethyl)-5-oxo-1H-imidazol-2-yl]-3-
pyridinecarboxylic acid), in or on rice, bran at 0.15 ppm and rice,
grain at 0.06 ppm.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action establishes tolerances under FFDCA section 408(d) in
response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and
Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this action has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this action is not
subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), or Executive Order 13045, entitled
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not contain any
information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require any
special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerances in
this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
    This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
tribal Governments, on the relationship between the National Government
and the States or tribal Governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999), and Executive Order 13175, entitled
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000), do not apply to this action. In addition,
this action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any
unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
    This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).

VII. Congressional Review Act

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

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

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

    Dated: August 18, 2023.
Charles Smith,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180--TOLERANCES AND EXEMPTIONS FOR PESTICIDE CHEMICAL RESIDUES
IN FOOD

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

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

0
2. In Sec.  180.500, amend the table in paragraph (a) by:
0
a. Adding a heading for the table;
0
b. Adding in alphabetical order the entries ``Rice, bran'' and ``Rice,
grain''; and
0
c. Revising footnote 1.
    The additions and revision read as follows:

Sec.  180.500   Imazapyr; tolerances for residues.

    (a) * * *

                        Table 1 to Paragraph (a)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Parts per
                         Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                * * * * *
Rice, bran \1\.............................................         0.15
Rice, grain \1\............................................         0.06

                                * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no U.S. registrations as of August 24, 2023.

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2023-18222 Filed 8-23-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


			  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

		        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

			  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

			          WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation on April 21, 2003

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST 1997-3132

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Applicant:  AEROTAXIS METROPOLITANOS, S.A. de C.V.
              Date Filed: March 25, 2003

Relief requested:  Exemption from 49 USC section 41301 to permit the
applicant to continue to conduct passenger charter operations between
Mexico and the United States, and other passenger charter operations in
accordance with 14 CFR Part 212, using small equipment.

If renewal, date and citation of last action:  March 25, 2002

Applicant representative(s):  Eugene E. Smith,<PHONE_NUMBER>
DOT analyst:  Allen F. Brown,<PHONE_NUMBER>

Responsive pleadings:  None.

	DISPOSITION

Action:  Approved.
              Action date:  April 21, 2003

Effective dates of authority granted:  April 21, 2003, through April 21,
2004.

Basis for approval (bilateral agreement/reciprocity):  United
States-Mexico Air Transport Services Agreement of August 15, 1960, as
amended and extended (Agreement).

Except to the extent exempted/waived, this authority is subject to the
terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:  Standard exemption
conditions.

Special conditions/Partial grant/Denial basis/Remarks:  In the conduct
of these operations, the carrier must adhere to all applicable
provisions of the U.S.-Mexico Agreement.  In the conduct of these
operations, the carrier may only use aircraft capable of carrying no
more than 60 passengers and having a maximum payload capacity of no more
than 18,000 pounds (small equipment).  The above grant includes
authority to conduct Third and Fourth Freedom charter operations.  While
we have subjected, consistent with the provisions of the Agreement,
Mexican carriers conducting charter operations with large aircraft to
prior approval or submission of notice for their Third and Fourth
Freedom charters, we determined that any such requirement was not
necessary on public interest grounds in this case, since the carrier
will be conducting these operations solely with small aircraft.  (Other
charter operations to/from the United States under this authority,
however, are subject to prior approval under 14 CFR Part 212.)  Further,
we are continuing to allow Mexican carriers conducting passenger
charters using small equipment to make stopovers in the United States in
the conduct of such operations.

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director

		      Office of International Aviation

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (2) the applicant was qualified to perform its proposed
operations; (3) grant of the authority was consistent with the public
interest; and (4) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.
To the extent not granted/deferred/dismissed, we denied all requests in
the referenced Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority
granted in this Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR
§385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date
of issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and
the filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An
electroni敶獲潩景琠楨⁳潤畣敭瑮椠⁳癡楡慬汢湯
琠敨圠牯摬圠摩敗瑡ഺ瑨灴⼺搯獭搮瑯朮癯⼯敲潰
瑲⽳敲潰瑲彳癡慩楴湯愮灳