[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 49 (Monday, March 14, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 14224-14227]
[FR Doc No: 2022-05260]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 312

[EPA-HQ-OLEM-2021-0946; FRL-9334-01-OLEM]

Standards and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to amend the Standards and Practices for All
Appropriate Inquiries to reference a standard practice recently made
available by ASTM International, a widely recognized standards
development organization. Specifically, EPA is proposing to amend the
All Appropriate Inquiries Rule to reference ASTM International's E1527-
21 ``Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I
Environmental Site Assessment Process'' and allow for its use to
satisfy the requirements for conducting all appropriate inquiries under
the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act. In the ``Rules and Regulations'' section in this issue of Federal
Register, EPA is amending the All Appropriate Inquiries Rule to
reference ASTM International's E1527-21 standard practice as a direct
final rule without a prior proposed rule. If we receive no adverse
comment, we will not take further action on this proposed rule.

DATES: Written comments must be received by April 13, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OLEM-2021-0946 at www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line

instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from regulations.gov. 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 and multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For more detailed information on
specific aspects of this proposed rule, contact Patricia Overmeyer,
Office of Brownfields and Land Revitalization (5105T), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW,
Washington, DC 20460-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,' ``us,'' and
``our'' refer to the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Why is EPA issuing this proposed rule?
II. Does this action apply to me?
III. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?
IV. Statutory Authority
V. Background
VI. What action is EPA taking today?
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Why is EPA issuing this proposed rule?

    With this action EPA proposes to amend the All Appropriate
Inquiries Rule at 40 CFR part 312 to reference ASTM International's
E1527-21 ``Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase
I Environmental Site Assessment Process'' and allow for its use to
satisfy the requirements for conducting all appropriate inquiries under
CERCLA. We published a direct final rule amending the All Appropriate
Inquiries Rule to reference the ASTM E1527-21 standard and allow for
its use to comply with the All Appropriate Inquiries Rule in the
``Rules and Regulations'' section in this issue of the Federal Register
because we view this as a noncontroversial action and anticipate no
adverse comment. We explained our reasons for this action in the
preamble to the direct final rule.
    If EPA receives no adverse comment, we will not take further action
on this proposed rule. If we receive adverse comment, we will withdraw
the direct final rule and it will not take effect. We will then address
all public comments in any subsequent final rule based on this proposed
rule. We do not intend to institute a second comment period on this
action. Any parties interested in commenting on this proposal must do
so at this time or the direct final rule will take effect. For further
information, please see the information provided in the ADDRESSES
section of this document.

II. Does this action apply to me?

    This action offers certain parties the option of using an available
industry standard to conduct all appropriate inquiries. Parties
purchasing potentially contaminated properties will be able to use the
ASTM E1527-21 standard practice to comply with the all appropriate
inquiries requirements of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). This proposed rule will not
require any entity to use this standard. Any party who wants to claim
protection from liability under one of CERCLA's landowner liability
protections may follow the regulatory requirements of the All
Appropriate Inquiries Rule at 40 CFR part 312, use the ASTM E1527-13
standard, use the ASTM E2247-16 ``Standard Practice for Environmental
Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process for
Forestland or Rural Property,'' or use the standard recognized in this
proposed rule, the ASTM E1527-21 standard.
    Entities potentially affected by this action, or who may choose to
use the newly referenced ASTM standard to perform all appropriate
inquiries, include public and private parties who, as bona fide
prospective purchasers, contiguous property owners, or innocent
landowners, are purchasing potentially contaminated properties and wish
to establish a limitation on CERCLA liability in conjunction with the
property purchase. In addition, any entity conducting a site
characterization or assessment on a property with a brownfields grant
awarded under CERCLA section 104(k)(2)(B)(ii) may be affected by this
action. This includes state, local and Tribal governments that receive
brownfields site assessment grants. A summary of the potentially
affected industry sectors (by North American Industry Classification
System (NAICS) codes) is displayed in the table below.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Industry category                        NAICS code
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Real Estate........................  531
Insurance..........................  52412
Banking/Real Estate Credit.........  522292
Environmental Consulting Services..  54162
State, Local and Tribal Government.  926110, 925120
Federal Government.................  925120, 921190, 924120
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The list of potentially affected entities in the above table may
not be exhaustive. Our aim is to provide a guide for readers regarding
those entities that EPA is aware potentially could be affected by this
action. However, this action may affect other entities not listed in
the table. If you have questions regarding the applicability of this
action to a particular entity, consult the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Section of this document.

III. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OLEM-2021-0946. EPA's
policy is that all comments received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute.
    A. Submitting CBI: Do not submit any information that you consider
to be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email.
You can only submit CBI to EPA via U.S. mail at: HQ EPA Docket Center,
EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC
20460. Clearly mark all information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI
submitted on a disk or CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of
the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the
disk or CD ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In
addition to one complete version of the comment that includes
information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain
the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the
public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in
accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.

    B. Tips for Preparing Your Comments: When submitting comments,
remember to:
     Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other
identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date, and
page number).
     Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives
and substitute language for your requested changes.
     Describe any assumptions and provide any technical
information and/or data you used.
     If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
     Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggested alternative.
     Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the
use of profanity or personal threats.
     Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
    The www.regulations.gov website is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email
comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your
email address will be automatically captured and included as part of
the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on
the internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that
you include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters or any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional
information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at https://www2.epa.gov/edockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
    C. The docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Certain types of information claimed as CBI,
and other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute, will
not be available for public viewing in EPA's electronic public docket.
EPA's policy is that copyrighted material, such as ASTM International's
E1527-21 ``Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase
I Environmental Site Assessment Process'' will not be placed in EPA's
electronic public docket but will be publicly available only in printed
form in the official public docket. Publicly available docket materials
are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy at the HQ EPA Docket Center, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460. Please note: Due to public
health concerns related to COVID-19, the EPA Docket Center and Reading
Room are open to the public by appointment only, and walk-ins are not
allowed. Visitors to the Reading Room must complete docket material
requests in advance and then make an appointment to retrieve the
material. Please contact the EPA Reading Room staff at<PHONE_NUMBER>
or via the Dockets Customer Service email at [email protected] to arrange material requests and appointments.

IV. Statutory Authority

    EPA is proposing to amend the All Appropriate Inquiries Rule that
sets Federal standards for the conduct of ``all appropriate inquiries''
at 40 CFR part 312. The All Appropriate Inquiries Rule sets forth
standards and practices necessary for fulfilling the requirements of
CERCLA section 101(35)(B) as required to obtain CERCLA liability
protection and for conducting site characterizations and assessments
with the use of brownfields grants per CERCLA section 104(k)(2)(B)(ii).

V. Background

    On January 11, 2002, President Bush signed the Small Business
Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act (``the Brownfields
Amendments''). In general, the Brownfields Amendments to CERCLA provide
funds to assess and cleanup brownfields sites; clarify existing and
establish new CERCLA liability provisions related to certain types of
owners of contaminated properties; and provide funding to establish or
enhance State and Tribal cleanup programs. The Brownfields Amendments
revised some of the provisions of CERCLA section 101(35) and limited
liability under section 107 for bona fide prospective purchasers and
contiguous property owners, in addition to clarifying the requirements
necessary to establish the innocent landowner liability protection
under CERCLA. The Brownfields Amendments clarified the requirement that
parties purchasing potentially contaminated property undertake ``all
appropriate inquiries'' into prior ownership and use of property before
purchasing the property to qualify for protection from CERCLA
liability.
    The 2002 Brownfields Amendments to CERCLA required EPA to develop
regulations establishing standards and practices for how to conduct all
appropriate inquiries. EPA promulgated regulations that set standards
and practices for all appropriate inquiries on November 1, 2005 (70 FR
66070). In the regulation, EPA referenced, and recognized as compliant
with the rule, the ASTM E1527-05 ``Standard Practice for Environmental
Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Standard
Process.'' In December 2008, EPA used a direct final rule to amend the
All Appropriate Inquiries Rule to recognize another ASTM standard as
compliant, ASTM E2247-08 ``Standard Practice for Environmental Site
Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process for
Forestland or Rural Property.'' Both standards, the ASTM E1527-05 and
the ASTM E2247-08, were subsequently revised by ASTM International, and
the revised versions were referenced by EPA as compliant with the All
Appropriate Inquiries Rule. EPA referenced the ASTM E1527-13 standard
on August 15, 2013 (78 FR 49690) and referenced the ASTM E2247-16
standard on September 15, 2017 (82 FR 43310). Currently, the All
Appropriate Inquiries Rule (40 CFR part 312) allows for the use of the
ASTM E1527-13 standard or the ASTM E2247-16 standard to conduct all
appropriate inquiries, in lieu of following requirements included in
the Rule. Once this action is final, the All Appropriate Inquiries Rule
also will allow for the use of the ASTM E1527-21 standard.
    Recently, ASTM International published a revised standard for
conducting Phase I environmental site assessments. This standard, ASTM
E1527-21, ``Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase
I Environmental Site Assessment Process,'' was reviewed by EPA, and
determined by EPA to be compliant with the requirements of the All
Appropriate Inquiries Rule.

VI. What action is EPA taking today?

    This action will amend the All Appropriate Inquiries Rule to allow
for the use of ASTM E1527-21 to conduct all appropriate inquiries as
required under CERCLA for establishing the bona fide prospective
purchaser, contiguous property owner, and innocent landowner liability
protections.
    With this proposed action, parties seeking liability relief under
CERCLA's landowner liability protections, as well as recipients of
brownfields grants for conducting site assessments, will be considered
in compliance with the

requirements for all appropriate inquiries if such parties comply with
the procedures provided in the ASTM E1527-21, ``Standard Practice for
Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Process.'' EPA determined that it is reasonable to promulgate this
clarification as a direct final rule that is effective immediately,
rather than delay promulgation of the clarification until after receipt
and consideration of public comments. EPA made this determination based
upon the Agency's finding that the ASTM E1527-21 standard is compliant
with the All Appropriate Inquiries Rule, and the Agency sees no reason
to delay allowing for its use in conducting all appropriate inquiries.
    The Agency notes that this action will not require any party to use
the ASTM E1527-21 standard. Any party conducting all appropriate
inquiries to comply with CERCLA's bona fide prospective purchaser,
contiguous property owner, and innocent landowner liability protections
may continue to follow the provisions of the All Appropriate Inquiries
Rule at 40 CFR part 312, or continue to use either the ASTM E1527-13
standard or use the ASTM E2247-16 standard.
    This proposed action merely will allow for the use of the ASTM
E1527-21 ``Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase
I Environmental Site Assessment Process'' for those parties purchasing
potentially contaminated properties who want to use the ASTM E1527-21
standard in lieu of the following specific requirements of the All
Appropriate Inquiries Rule.
    The Agency notes that there are no legally significant differences
between the regulatory requirements and the ASTM E1527 standards. To
facilitate an understanding of the slight differences between the All
Appropriate Inquiries Rule, the ASTM E1527-13 ``Phase I Environmental
Site Assessment Standard,'' and the revised ASTM E1527-21 ``Standard
Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site
Assessment Process,'' as well as the applicability of the E1527-21
standard for certain types of properties, EPA developed, and placed in
the docket for this proposed action, the document ``Comparison of All
Appropriate Inquiries Regulation, the ASTM E1527-13 Phase I
Environmental Site Assessment Process, and ASTM E1527-21 Phase I
Environmental Site Assessment Process.'' The document provides a
comparison of the two ASTM E1527 standards.
    EPA's proposed action includes no changes to the All Appropriate
Inquiries Rule other than to add an additional reference to the new
ASTM E1527-21 standard. EPA is not seeking comments on the standards
and practices included in the All Appropriate Inquiries Rule published
at 40 CFR part 312. Also, EPA is not seeking comments on the ASTM
E1527-21 standard. EPA's only action with this proposed rule is
recognition of the ASTM E1527-21 standard as compliant with the All
Appropriate Inquiries Rule and, therefore, it is only this action on
which the Agency is seeking comment.
    EPA is proposing this action because the Agency wants to provide
additional flexibility for brownfields grant recipients or other
entities that may benefit from the use of the ASTM E1527-21 standard.
We believe that this proposed action will allow for the use of a
tailored standard that was developed by a recognized standards
developing organization, reviewed by EPA, and determined to be
equivalent to the Agency's All Appropriate Inquiries Rule. This action
does not disallow the use of the previously recognized standards (ASTM
E1527-13 or ASTM E2247-16), and it will not alter the requirements of
the previously promulgated All Appropriate Inquiries Rule. In addition,
this proposal potentially will increase flexibility for some parties
who may make use of the new standard, without placing any additional
burden on those parties who prefer to use either the ASTM E1527-13
standard or the ASTM E2247-16 or to follow the requirements of the All
Appropriate Inquiries Rule when conducting all appropriate inquiries.
    By proposing this action, EPA is fulfilling the intent and
requirements of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
(NTTAA), Public Law 104-113.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    For a complete discussion of all of the administrative requirements
applicable to this action, see the discussion in the ``Statutory and
Executive Order Reviews'' section to the preamble for the direct final
rule that is published in the ``Rules and Regulations'' section in this
issue of the Federal Register.
    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and
Executive Order 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011), this proposed
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and is therefore not
subject to OMB review. This action merely amends the All Appropriate
Inquiries Rule to reference ASTM International's E1527-21 ``Standard
Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site
Assessment Process'' and allow for its use to satisfy the requirements
for conducting all appropriate inquiries under CERCLA. This action does
not impose any requirements on any entity, including small entities.
Therefore, pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), after considering the economic impacts of this action on small
entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 312

    Administrative practice and procedure, Hazardous substances.

Barry N. Breen,
Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of Land and Emergency
Management.
[FR Doc. 2022-05260 Filed 3-11-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


While we do not believe that the proposed requirements for area sources pose more than a minimal burden to those sources, we specifically ask for comment on methods by which EPA could apply the additional regulatory burden being proposed by this rule to only those area sources which pose significant risks to human health. For example, we seek comments on whether there could be a methodology by which facilities could conduct site specific risk assessments to demonstrate that their PCE emissions pose cancer risk levels that are less than 1 in 1 million, with a hazard index of less than one, and with no acute or adverse environmental effects, and thereby avoid the additional requirements that would otherwise apply under the proposed rule revisions. Comments should address whether such an approach is feasible ( for example, if facilities would be able to conduct these risk assessments), the legal authority for such an approach, the methodology sources would use for conducting risk assessments, the specific criteria by which potential " low risk" sources would be evaluated, the mechanism for evaluating and determining whether source risk assessments meet those criteria, how the process would be implemented by federal and/ or state and local agencies, how it would be enforced ( for example, through a permitting program or other regulatory structure to ensure that any sources found to be " low risk" remain so), and what would be the consequences if and when a source for whatever reason is found to no longer qualify as a " low risk" source.


[Federal Register: October 2, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 190)]
[Notices]
[Page 56110-56111]
[DOCID:fr02oc07-85]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release Nos. 34-56534; IA-2658; File No. S7-24-07]

Public Alert: Unregistered Soliciting Entities (``Pause'')
Program

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission.

ACTION: Notice; request for comment.

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

SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or
``Commission'') is announcing a new program that will post on its Web
site certain factual information about unregistered entities that are
engaged in the solicitation of securities transactions.

DATES: Comments should be submitted on or before November 1, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

Electronic Comments

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

File Number S7-24-07 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.
    All submissions should refer to File Number S7-24-07. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help us process and review your comments more efficiently, please use
only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the
Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/other.shtml);

Comments also are available for public inspection and copying in the
Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3
p.m. All comments received will be posted without change; we do not
edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Reed Stark, Chief of the Office
of Internet Enforcement and Counselor to the Director, at (202) 551-
4540, Jack Hardy, Branch Chief, Office of Investor Education and
Advocacy, at<PHONE_NUMBER>, Alberto Arevalo, Acting Assistant
Director, Office of International Affairs, at<PHONE_NUMBER>, at the
Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC
20549-6628.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission today is announcing a new
program for informing the public about unregistered entities engaged in
solicitations of securities transactions. Through this new program,
``Public Alert: Unregistered Soliciting Entities'' (``PAUSE''), the
Commission will publish on its Web site certain factual information
about unregistered soliciting entities that have been the subject of
complaints forwarded by investors and others, including fellow
securities regulators. By making this information readily available,
the Commission expects investors to be better able to evaluate
solicitations to buy and sell securities. Before the program and Web
site become operational December 3, 2007 the Commission is interested
in receiving comments and suggestions on the PAUSE program.

1. Background

    Generally, entities that solicit purchases or sales of securities
for the accounts of other persons in the United States are required to
register with the SEC. The Commission regularly receives complaints and
inquiries from investors and others, including foreign securities
regulators, about solicitations made by entities claiming to be
registered, licensed and/or operating in the United States, and in some
cases, entities soliciting U.S. investors that are not registered in
the United States. When an entity claims to be registered with the SEC,
it is in effect claiming that it has made itself available for SEC
regulation and oversight. For this reason, it is important for
prospective investors to consider whether a soliciting entity is, in
fact, registered with the SEC.
    The Commission's Office of Investor Education and Advocacy
(``OIEA'') fields investor complaints and inquiries. The single largest
number of investor complaints received by OIEA concern solicitations of
investors by unregistered entities that appear to be involved in boiler
room and secondary advance fee schemes.\1\ In 2005 and 2006, OIEA

received respectively 1,385 and 1,418 complaints from investors who
were solicited by unregistered entities, many of which purported to be
U.S.-based securities firms trading in securities of U.S.-based
issuers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Boiler room operations use high-pressure sales tactics
generally over the telephone and solicit investors with false and/or
misleading information. They frequently purport to be registered
broker dealers and/or operating in the United States and offer
``opportunities'' to invest in securities, often issued by companies
organized in the United States. The schemes are disbanded and the
wrongdoers disappear after investors wire their money, which is then
transferred to offshore accounts. Secondary ``advance fee'' schemes
work very similarly to boiler room operations, the difference being
that an advance fee scheme generally targets investors who purchased
underperforming securities, perhaps through an affiliated boiler
room, offering to arrange a lucrative sale of those securities, but
first requiring the payment of an ``advance fee'' in the form of a
commission, regulatory fee or tax, or some other incidental expense.
The advance fees are paid, but the promised sale of the securities
is never arranged.
    For more information about boiler rooms and advance fee schemes,
please see the following discussions on our Web site:
     The Fleecing of Foreign Investors: Avoid Getting Burned
by ``Hot'' U.S. Stocks (http://www.sec.gov/investor/pubs/fleecing.htm
)

     Worthless Stock: How to Avoid Doubling Your Losses
(http://www.sec.gov/investor/pubs/worthless.htm)

     Protect Your Money: Check Out Brokers and Investment
Advisers (http://www.sec.gov/investor/brokers.htm)

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

    Moreover, perpetrators of boiler rooms and advance fee schemes
increasingly use new devices to convince investors that their
solicitations are legitimate, including:
     Impersonating U.S. registered securities firms by, for
example, using the same or a similar name or providing an address that
closely resembles that of a U.S. registered securities firm;
     Making false reference to, including false claims of
endorsement by, governmental agencies and international organizations
(sometimes even impersonating them); and
     Claiming endorsements by, or making other reference to,
governmental agencies and international organizations that sound
official, but do not exist.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ In one case, a soliciting entity impersonated the
International Organization of Securities Commissions (``IOSCO'').
The Securities Investor Protection Corporation (``SIPC'') has also
been impersonated by virtue of a ``look alike'' Web site and
responded by posting an alert identifying the fictitious
organization, the ``International Brokerage Association.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our staff is frequently able to determine quickly the accuracy of
various claims made by the soliciting entities. For example, a claim by
an entity that it is a U.S. registered broker-dealer is easily
verifiable by checking public sources, including the Central
Registration Depository database administered by the Financial Industry
Regulatory Authority, Inc. (formerly, the NASD).\3\ Entities that use
names that are the same as, or similar to, the names of U.S. registered
securities firms can also be verified by checking public sources and
obtaining information from officials at the firms. In this way, our
staff can also determine whether the complained-of entity has any
actual affiliation with the registered firm. A claim that an entity
operates from a particular location in the United States can also be
established. Finally, if a soliciting entity claims that the securities
it offers are approved or endorsed by a particular governmental agency,
that claim can usually also be quickly confirmed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ http://www.nasd.com/InvestorInformation/InvestorProtection/ChecktheBackgroundofYourInvestmentProfessional/index.htm_____________________________________-

___________-

    In appropriate cases, our staff's review may lead to a referral to
the Division of Enforcement, which may begin an investigation of
possible securities law violations, and the Commission may ultimately
bring an enforcement action for such violations. However, in a
significant number of cases there may be obstacles to effective
enforcement action. Soliciting entities change names frequently, often
before law enforcement action can be taken. Often the subjects of
complaints purport to be based in the United States, but in fact
operate from numerous jurisdictions overseas. Notwithstanding
cooperation with foreign counterparts, investigations of offshore
operations can be complex and time-consuming. Even if the Division of
Enforcement's investigation determines that the entities involved in
such activities have sufficient contacts with the United States to
grant the Commission and U.S. courts with jurisdiction over their
conduct, there can be substantial obstacles to completing legal action
against these foreign operators and obtaining meaningful relief, while
in the meantime investors can suffer significant harm.

2. The PAUSE Program

    In light of the challenges associated with taking enforcement
action against such operations, the Commission believes that it is
useful to devise a complementary approach that serves to empower
prospective investors. The goal of the PAUSE Program is to provide
prospective investors with relevant information about unregistered
soliciting entities before they invest.
    To implement the PAUSE Program, the Commission will post on its
public Web site specific information about unregistered soliciting
entities that have been the subject of complaints. For each of these
entities, the Commission's staff will have determined either (1) That
there is no U.S. registered securities firm with that name, or (2) that
there is a U.S. registered securities firm with the same (or a similar)
name but that solicitations appear to have been made by persons not
affiliated with the U.S. registered securities firm.
    In addition, the PAUSE list will contain a ``Comments'' section for
each entry. The Comments section will reflect certain results of the
staff's investigation addressing the entity's U.S. registration status;
any use of a name that is the same or similar to that of a U.S.
registered securities firm; and any references to governmental agencies
and international organizations in the solicitations. The Comments
section may include other relevant information that may be helpful to
investors, such as the use of addresses that do not appear to exist.
    A second PAUSE list will name fictitious governmental agencies and
international organizations referred to by complained-of entities.

3. Additional Information

    The Commission's intent is to publish factual information that may
be valuable to investors in connection with their investment
decisions.\4\ A listing on the PAUSE web page does not mean that the
Commission has found violations of U.S. federal securities laws or made
a judgment about the merits of any securities offered by listed
entities. As well, the PAUSE web page will not necessarily include
information about all unregistered entities or entities that have been
the subject of complaints. There may be various reasons, including law
enforcement and policy, which may militate against including
information about an entity on the PAUSE web page. The Commission
intends to regularly update the PAUSE lists and archive information
approximately nine months from the date of last observed activity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Sec.  section 21(a). Cf.
Kukatush Mining Corp. v. Securities and Exchange Commission, 309
F.2d 647 (D.C. Cir. 1962); and Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C.
552.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. Corrections

    The Commission is committed to providing accurate information under
the PAUSE Program. Before listing an entity on PAUSE, the Commission's
staff will notify the entity and provide an opportunity--two calendar
days from the date of the staff's notification letter--for the entity
to respond. If, after being listed on PAUSE, an entity believes it
should be removed from a list because information included about it is
incorrect, or for other reasons, it should notify the Commission's
staff and provide such documents and other information as reasonably
necessary to support its assertion.
    To notify the Commission of a factual error or to request removal
from a list, please write to the following address: U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission, Attn: PAUSE Program Administrator, 100 F Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20549-5631<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Fax: 202-
772-9278.
    Submissions will be reviewed for appropriate action by Commission
staff.
* * * * *

    Dated: September 26, 2007.

    By the Commission.
Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-19343 Filed 10-1-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: June 3, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 107)]
[Notices]
[Page 31681-31683]
[DOCID:fr03jn08-33]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0078; FRL-8574-8]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Reporting Under EPA's Landfill Methane Outreach
Program--EPA ICR No. 1849.03

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this document announces that EPA is planning to
submit a request to reinstate a previously approved Information
Collection Request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
The previously approved ICR expired on 07/31/2007.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before August 4, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2003-0078 by one of the following methods: http://
www.regulations.gov: Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Fax Number:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Phone Number:<PHONE_NUMBER>. Mail: Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0078,
Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW., Room 3334, Washington, DC 20460 (Attention
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0078). Such deliveries are only accepted
during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements
should be made for deliveries of boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2003-0078. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public
docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/
epahome/dockets.htm.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Victoria Ludwig, Climate Change
Division, Office of Atmospheric Programs, 6207J, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

How Can I Access the Docket and/or Submit Comments?

    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0078, which is available for online viewing at
http://www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Air and
Radiation Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room
3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public
Reading Room is open from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is
202-566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air and Radiation Docket
is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Use http://www.regulations.gov to obtain a copy of the
previously approved Information Collection Request EPA ICR No. 1849.03,
submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the
contents of the docket, and to access those documents in the public
docket that are available electronically. Once in the system, select
``search,'' then key in the docket ID number identified in this
document.

What Information Is EPA Particularly Interested in?

    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA specifically
solicits

comments and information to enable it to:
    (i) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency,
including whether the information will have practical utility;
    (ii) Evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden
of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of
the methodology and assumptions used;
    (iii) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
to be collected; and
    (iv) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses. In particular, EPA is requesting comments from
very small businesses (those that employ less than 25) on examples of
specific additional efforts that EPA could make to reduce the paperwork
burden for very small businesses affected by this collection.

What Should I Consider When I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your
comments:
    (1) Explain your views as clearly as possible and provide specific
examples.
    (2) Describe any assumptions that you used.
    (3) Provide copies of any technical information and/or data you
used that support your views.
    (4) If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you
arrived at the estimate that you provide.
    (5) Offer alternative ways to improve the collection activity.
    (6) Make sure to submit your comments by the deadline identified
under DATES.
    (7) To ensure proper receipt by EPA, be sure to identify the docket
ID number assigned to this action in the subject line on the first page
of your response. You may also provide the name, date, and Federal
Register citation.

What Information Collection Activity or ICR Does This Apply to?

    Affected entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are
those private companies and municipalities that own or operate
landfills; State agencies; manufacturers and suppliers of equipment/
knowledge to capture and utilize landfill gas; utility companies; end
users of energy from the landfill; and other landfill gas energy
stakeholders.
    Title: Reporting Under EPA's Landfill Methane Outreach Program.
    ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 1849.03, OMB Control No. 2060-0446.
    ICR status: This ICR expired on 07/31/2007. The EPA is reinstating
a previously approved ICR. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a
person is not required to respond to, a collection of information,
unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB
control numbers for EPA's regulations in Title 40 of the CFR, after
appearing in the Federal Register when approved, are listed in 40 CFR
part 9, and are displayed either by publication in the Federal Register
or by other appropriate means, such as on the related collection
instrument or form, if applicable. The display of OMB control numbers
in certain EPA regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: The Landfill Methane Outreach Program (LMOP), created by
EPA as part of the Climate Change Action Plan, is a voluntary program
designed to encourage and facilitate the development of environmentally
and economically sound landfill gas (LFG) energy projects across the
United States in order to reduce methane emissions from landfills. LMOP
does this by educating local governments and communities about the
benefits of LFG recovery and use; building partnerships between state
agencies, industry, energy service providers, local communities, and
other stakeholders interested in developing this valuable resource in
their community; and providing tools to evaluate LFG energy (LFGE)
potential. LMOP signs voluntary Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) with
these organizations to enlist their support in promoting cost-effective
LFG utilization. The information collection includes completion and
submission of the MOU, and annual completion and submission of
information forms that include basic information on landfill methane
projects with which the organizations are involved. The information
collection also includes a one-time effort to update the LMOP Landfill
and Landfill Gas Energy Project Database. The information collection is
to be utilized to maintain up-to-date data and information about LMOP
Partners and landfill methane projects with which they are involved.
The data will also be used by the public to assess LFGE project
development opportunities in the United States. In addition, the
information collection will assist LMOP in evaluating the reduction of
methane emissions from landfills. Responses to the information
collection are voluntary.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 4.7
hours for each respondent. Burden means the total time, effort, or
financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain,
or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train
personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search
data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and
transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    The ICR provides a detailed explanation of the Agency's estimate,
which is only briefly summarized in this notice. The LMOP information
collection is expected to involve an average of 832 existing Partners
and an additional 114 new Partners per year. In order to meet the needs
of public requests for data and to assess the potential of future LFGE
opportunities, there is a planned one-time information collection for
1,000 additional landfill owners and operators. The average annual
burden (rounded to one decimal place) and cost per respondent is
estimated to be 4.7 hours and $273. The total annual reporting and
recordkeeping burden averaged over three years is 5,885 hours and
$344,827. This includes an estimated burden cost of $343,485 and an
estimated cost of $1,342 for maintenance and operational costs.

Are There Changes in the Estimates From the Last Approval?

    There is an increase of 1,257 hours in the total estimated annual
respondent burden compared with that identified in the ICR previously
approved by OMB. This increase reflects a large growth in the number of
LMOP Partners since the last renewal. Since the last ICR renewal, LMOP
no longer collects information annually from Energy, State, and non-
developer Industry Partners, the information forms have been simplified
into pre-populated spreadsheets, and other collection efficiencies have
been implemented such as the option to submit MOUs electronically. As a
result of these changes, the average number of

hours per Partner has decreased, but the total hourly burden for LMOP
Partners still increased because of an increase in the number of
Partners. For perspective on the magnitude of Partner growth, there
were 365 Partners at the end of 2003 when the ICR was last renewed,
whereas there were 675 Partners as of July 2007. This indicates an 85%
increase in Partners since the last renewal. The remainder of the
increase in total hourly burden comes from a planned initiative to
collect critical landfill data from 1,000 additional landfill owners
and operators. These data are necessary in order to better respond to
public data requests and evaluate the potential of future LFGE
opportunities. This type of data collection has not occurred before
during LMOP's history. This change is the result of a program change.

What Is the Next Step in the Process for This ICR?

    EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as
appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for
review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. At that time, EPA will
issue another Federal Register notice pursuant to 5 CFR
1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the
opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB. If you have any
questions about this ICR or the approval process, please contact the
technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Dated: May 6, 2008.
Dina Kruger,
Director, Climate Change Division.
[FR Doc. E8-12371 Filed 6-2-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: October 15, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 200)]
[Notices]
[Page 61113-61114]
[DOCID:fr15oc08-78]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-RCRA-2008-0463; FRL-8730-1]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for
Review and Approval; Comment Request; RCRA Expanded Public
Participation (Renewal); EPA ICR No. 1688.06, OMB Control No. 2050-0149

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)(44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq. ), this document announces that an Information Collection
Request (ICR) has been forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review and approval. This is a request to renew an existing
approved collection. The ICR, which is abstracted below, describes the
nature of the information collection and its estimated burden and cost.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before November 14,
2008.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-RCRA-
2008-0463, to (1) EPA, either online using http://www.regulations.gov
(our preferred method), or by e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail
to: RCRA Docket (28221T), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460; and (2) OMB, by mail
to: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th Street,
NW., Washington, DC 20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Norma Abdul-Malik, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB
for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR
1320.12. On June 10, 2008 (73 FR 32703), EPA sought comments on this
ICR pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received no comments. Any
additional comments on this ICR should be submitted to EPA and OMB
within 30 days of this notice.
    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-RCRA-2008-0463, which is available for online viewing at
http://www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Docket in the EPA Docket Center
(EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington,
DC. The EPA/DC 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 Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for
the RCRA Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Use EPA's electronic docket and comment system at http://
www.regulations.gov, to submit or view public comments, access the
index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those
documents in the docket that are available electronically. Once in the
system, select ``docket search,'' then key in the docket ID number
identified above. Please note that EPA's policy is that public
comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made
available for public viewing at http://www.regulations.gov as EPA
receives them and without change, unless the comment contains
copyrighted material, confidential business information (CBI), or other
information whose public disclosure is restricted by statute. For
further information about the electronic docket, go to http://
www.regulations.gov.
    Title: RCRA Expanded Public Participation (Renewal).
    ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 1688.06, OMB Control No. 2050-0149.
    ICR Status: This ICR is scheduled to expire on October 31, 2008.
Under OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor
the collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB.
An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations
in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register when
approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed either by
publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such
as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The
display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is
consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: Section 7004(b) of RCRA gives EPA broad authority to
provide for, encourage, and assist public participation in the
development, revision, implementation, and enforcement of any
regulation, guideline, information, or program under RCRA. In addition,
the statute specifies certain public notices (i.e., radio, newspaper,
and a letter to relevant agencies) that EPA must provide before issuing
any RCRA permit. The statute also establishes a process by which the
public can dispute a permit and request a public hearing to discuss it.
    EPA promulgated requirements for providing additional opportunities
for the public to be involved in the RCRA permitting process at 40 CFR
124.31 through 124.33 and at 40 CFR 270.62 and 270.66. EPA believes
that these regulations encourage people to become involved in the
permitting process and increase understanding of hazardous waste
facilities.
    In summary, the expanded public participation regulations require:
     A permit applicant to provide notice of and hold an
informal meeting with the public before submitting a Part B
application, and to submit a summary of the meeting to the agency
(Sec.  124.31);
     The Agency to issue a public notice when it receives an
application (Sec.  124.32);
     Certain facilities (as decided by the Agency Director on a
case-by-case basis) to set up and maintain an information repository
(Sec.  124.33); and
     The Agency to issue a public notice of an upcoming trial
burn at a permitted hazardous waste combustion facility (Sec. Sec.
270.62(b)(6) and 270.66(d)(3)), or at a hazardous waste combustion
facility operating under interim status (Sec. Sec.  270.62(d) and
270.66(g)).
    Burden Statement: The annual reporting and recordkeeping burden for
this collection of information is estimated to average 91 hours per
response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources
expended

by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide
information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed
to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements
which have subsequently changed; train personnel to be able to respond
to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and
review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise
disclose the information.
    Respondents/Affected Entities: Businesses and other for-profit.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 33.
    Frequency of Response: On occasion.
    Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 3,005.
    Estimated Total Annual Cost: $180,288, which includes $176,791 for
annualized labor costs and $3,497 for annualized capital or O&M costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is no change in the total estimated
burden hours currently identified in the OMB Inventory of Approved ICR
Burdens.

    Dated: October 9, 2008.
Sara Hisel-McCoy,
Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. E8-24598 Filed 10-14-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 212 (Friday, November 3, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 51170-51172]
[FR Doc No: 2017-23606]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2017-0838; Product Identifier 2017-NE-33-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Safran Helicopter Engines, S.A.,
Turboshaft Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Safran Helicopter Engines, S.A., Arriel 2E turboshaft engines. This
proposed AD was prompted by reports of ruptured front support pins on
the accessory gearbox front support. This proposed AD would require
replacement of the accessory gearbox front support. We are proposing
this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: We must receive comments on this NPRM by December 18, 2017.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Safran Helicopter Engines, S.A., 40220 Tarnos, France; phone: (33) 05
59 74 40 00; fax: (33) 05 59 74 45 15. You may view this service
information at the FAA, Engine and Propeller Standards Branch, 1200
District Avenue, Burlington, MA. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-
0838; or in person at the Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this proposed AD, the mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI), the regulatory evaluation, any comments received,
and other information. The address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-
647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in
the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Green, Aerospace Engineer, ECO
Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: 781-
238-7754; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite 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-2017-0838;
Product Identifier 2017-NE-33-AD'' at the beginning of your comments.
We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this NPRM. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date and may amend this NPRM because
of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact
with FAA personnel concerning this NPRM.

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA
AD No. 2016-0235, dated November 24, 2016 (referred to hereinafter as
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified
products. The MCAI states:

    Some cases were reported of ruptured front support pins on
ARRIEL 1E2 engines. That condition, if not detected and corrected,
could lead to the loss of the load path integrity of the engine
front support. Consequently, Turbom[eacute]ca issued Mandatory
Service Bulletin (MSB) 292 72 0842 to provide instructions for the
inspection of the pins and front support replacement, and EASA
issued AD 2015-0064 (later revised) to require those actions. Since
EASA AD 2015-0064R1 was issued, SAFRAN Helicopter Engines developed
a new pin design, in order to increase the mechanical strength of
the pin, through modification TU380, for ARRIEL 1E2 engines.
Although no cases of front support pin rupture have been reported on
ARRIEL 2E engines, since the ARRIEL 1E2 and 2E type designs have the
same front support, SAFRAN Helicopter Engines decided to also apply
this new pin design on ARRIEL 2E engines through modification TU197.
To address this potential unsafe condition, SAFRAN Helicopter
Engines decided, as precautionary measure, to replace the front
support on ARRIEL 2E engines, and published MSB 292 72 2197 to
provide instructions for in-service front support replacement. For
the reasons described above, this AD requires modification of the
affected engines by replacement of each pre-mod TU197 front support.

    You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD
docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-0838.

Related Service Information

    We reviewed Safran Helicopter Engines, S.A., Mandatory Service
Bulletin (MSB) No. 292 72 2197, Version A, dated September 15, 2016.
The MSB describes procedures for replacement of the accessory gearbox
front support. This service information is reasonably available because
the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of France,
and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our
bilateral agreement with the European Community, EASA has notified us
of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI. We are proposing this AD
because we evaluated all information provided by EASA and determined
the unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other
products of the same type design. This proposed AD would require for
replacement of the accessory gearbox front support.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 28 engines installed on
aircraft of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
                Action                         Labor cost           Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Front support replacement.............  2 work-hours x $85 per           $19,731         $19,901        $557,228
                                         hour = $170.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to
exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.
    This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the
Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by
FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is
normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but
during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the
authority to issue ADs applicable to engines, propellers, and
associated appliances to the Manager, Engine and Propeller Standards
Branch, Policy and Innovation Division.

Regulatory Findings

    We 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) Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

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):

Safran Helicopter Engines, S.A. (Type Certificate previously held by
Turbomeca, S.A): Docket No. FAA-2017-0838; Product Identifier 2017-
NE-33-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by December 18, 2017.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Safran Helicopter Engines S.A. Arriel 2E
turboshaft engines with front support, part number 0 292 11 715 0,
installed (pre-mod TU 197 configuration).

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 8300, Accessory
Gearboxes.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of ruptured front support pins
on the accessory gearbox front support. We are issuing this AD to
prevent failure of a front support, loss of engine thrust control
and reduced control of the helicopter.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Required Actions

    Before the accessory gearbox and transmission shaft module
(Module 01) accumulates 1,600 engine operating hours since new, or
within 80 engine operating hours after the effective date of this
AD, whichever occurs later, replace the front support with a part
eligible for installation.

(h) Definition

    For the purpose of this AD, a part eligible for installation is
a Module 01 with a pre-mod TU 197 front support, that has not
accumulated more than 1,680 engine operating hours since new; or a
Module 01 with a post-mod TU 197 front support.

(i) Installation Prohibition

    As of the effective date of this AD, you may not install a pre-
mod TU 197 front support on any engine with a post-mod TU 197 front
support installed.

(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, FAA, ECO Branch, has the authority to approve
AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR
39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your
principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the
ECO Branch, send it to the attention of the person identified in
paragraph (k)(1) of this AD. You may email your request to: [email protected].
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

(k) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Robert Green,
Aerospace Engineer, ECO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue,
Burlington, MA 01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
[email protected].
    (2) Refer to MCAI EASA AD 2016-0235, dated November 24, 2016,
for more information. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on
the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating it in Docket No. FAA-2017-0838.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on October 24, 2017.
Robert J. Ganley,
Manager, Engine and Propeller Standards Branch, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-23606 Filed 11-2-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: April 24, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 78)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 18626-18628]
[DOCID:fr24ap09-4]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 589

[Docket No. FDA-2002-N-0031] (formerly Docket No. 2002N-0273)
RIN 0910-AF46

Substances Prohibited From Use in Animal Food or Feed;
Confirmation of Effective Date of Final Rule

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Final rule; confirmation of effective date.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is confirming the
effective date of April 27, 2009, for the final rule that published in
the Federal Register of April 25, 2008 (73 FR 22720), entitled
``Substances Prohibited From Use in Animal Food or Feed.'' The agency
is also establishing a compliance date of October 26, 2009, for this
rule in order to allow additional time for renderers to comply with the
new requirements. This additional time will also give other affected
persons, including cattle producers and packers, more time to identify
appropriate methods for disposing of material prohibited from use in
animal feed by this rule.

DATES: Effective Date: The effective date of the final rule published
in the Federal Register of April 25, 2008 (73 FR 22720), is April 27,
2009.
    Compliance Date: The compliance date is October 26, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Burt Pritchett, Center for Veterinary
Medicine (HFV-222), Food and Drug Administration, 7519 Standish Pl.,
Rockville, MD 20855,<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    In the Federal Register of April 25, 2008, FDA published a final
rule entitled ``Substances Prohibited From Use in Animal Food or Feed''
(referred to herein as the April 25, 2008, final rule), that would
become effective 1 year after the April 27, 2009, date of publication.
These measures were established to further strengthen existing
safeguards against bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE). FDA recently
became aware that some affected persons are experiencing difficulties
modifying their operations to comply with the new requirements
contained in the April 25, 2008, final

rule and, therefore, may not be in full compliance by the April 27,
2009, effective date. Accordingly, in the Federal Register of April 9,
2009 (74 FR 16160) (referred to herein as the April 9, 2009, proposal),
FDA published a proposal that would delay the effective date of the
April 25, 2008, final rule for 60 days and provided a period for public
comment on this proposal of 7 days.

II. Comments

    The agency received comments from over 400 organizations and
individuals on the April 9, 2009, proposal. Many comments were received
from state and national cattle producer organizations, as well as from
individual cattle producers. A large number of individual consumers
also submitted comments. Comments were also received from renderers,
meat processors, dairy organizations, and State agriculture agencies.
    Those opposed to a delay of the effective date primarily cited a
heightened risk of BSE to U.S. consumers and the U.S. cattle herd from
imports of live Canadian cattle, particularly those cattle over 30
months of age. Most of these comments also noted that the current U.S.
feed ban implemented in 1997 is comparable to the initial Canadian feed
ban, also implemented in 1997, which, according to these comments, has
proven to be ineffective at preventing the spread of BSE in Canada.
This position was echoed in the many comments received from persons
concerned with Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease.
    Those in favor of a delay of the effective date cited the need for
more time to identify alternative methods of disposal of cattle
material prohibited in animal feed (CMPAF) from slaughter and dead
stock cattle in areas of the country where rendering services are
curtailed or no longer available because of the rule. Some renderers
and dead stock haulers commented that they were choosing to discontinue
picking up dead cattle due to difficulties complying with the new rule.
Many of the comments suggested that the proposed 60-day delay was not
adequate with some comments suggesting delays of 6 months to 1 year.
Also, a number of comments asked that the effective date be delayed
indefinitely until the carcass disposal problem was more fully
resolved. Several comments urged FDA to work with other Government
agencies to develop a disposal plan for CMPAF and dead stock cattle
before implementing the rule.

III. Discussion

    FDA continues to believe that the new measures contained in the
April 25, 2008, final rule are necessary to further strengthen existing
safeguards against BSE. The underlying bases for these new measures
were fully considered through the notice and comment rulemaking
process. (See the October 6, 2005, proposed rule (70 FR 58570) and the
April 25, 2008, final rule).
    The April 9, 2009, proposal to delay the effective date was issued
solely for the purpose of considering whether a delay should be
provided to allow time to address concerns that some entities were not
adequately prepared to comply with the April 25, 2008, final rule and
that adequate alternative carcass disposal methods had not been
developed. Therefore, any delay in the implementation of this rule is
intended to help address these concerns and is not intended to signal
that the agency is reconsidering the final rule. Based on the
significant number of comments that oppose delaying the effective date
of the April 25, 2008, final rule due to public and animal health
concerns, FDA is confirming the original April 27, 2009, effective date
of the final rule. However, although the final rule is effective on
April 27, 2009, FDA has decided to establish a compliance date of
October 26, 2009, for those who need it, to help address the compliance
and implementation concerns.
    In its rulemaking, FDA acknowledged that alternative disposal
methods for CMPAF and dead stock cattle would be needed for a
substantial volume of material that would be diverted from animal feed
use by the new requirements. Accordingly, the rule provided a 12-month
delayed effective date to allow sufficient time to arrange for
alternative disposal. Where services to remove brain and spinal cord
will not be available, such arrangements might include composting dead
stock cattle, or disposing of dead stock cattle in landfills. To some
extent, we believe the rendering, livestock, meat, and animal feed
industries have addressed many of the compliance and carcass disposal
challenges and are prepared to meet the April 27, 2009, effective date
of the final rule.
    By affirming the April 27, 2009, effective date, renderers can
begin putting the new BSE safeguards into place by removing the
prohibited cattle materials from the animal feed chain. However, it is
apparent from the comments that a significant number of other
stakeholders will not be ready to deal effectively with the new
regulation when it goes into effect on April 27, 2009. In particular,
smaller entities such as dead stock haulers, small meat processors, and
some livestock producers have only recently become aware that their
current disposal arrangements will no longer be available, or will be
available at increased cost, as a result of the April 25, 2008, final
rule. In addition, comments from certain State agencies have indicated
that adequate alternative measures have not yet been developed for
disposing of animal carcasses, particularly in areas where rendering is
limited or may no longer be available. Generally, the disposal of
animal carcasses is regulated at the State and local level. For
example, State law may dictate whether dead animals can be buried or
composted, or whether an incinerator needs to be approved before one is
built. Furthermore, some landfill operators have indicated that they do
not intend to accept dead animals or CMPAF because they consider it to
be hazardous material. FDA has consulted with the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) on this issue and EPA has recently published a
statement on its Web site stating that, under the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA), EPA considers CMPAF to be solid waste, not
hazardous waste (http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/nonhaz/municipal/landfill/
cattle.htm). (FDA has verified the Web site address, but FDA is not
responsible for any subsequent changes to the Web site after this
document publishes in the Federal Register.)
    Based on a consideration of all comments received in response to
the April 9, 2009, proposal, FDA believes the most appropriate action
is to confirm the April 27, 2009, effective date, and delay compliance
until October 26, 2009. Confirming the April 27, 2009, effective date
conveys the agency's clear intent to move forward with the
implementation of the new measures. As stated previously, some affected
parties are prepared to begin implementation. Providing for a 6-month
delay for compliance acknowledges the significant number of affected
stakeholders who will require more time to comply with the new
regulation or adjust to the loss of rendering service. For renderers,
who are directly impacted by this regulation, this means modifying
their operations to effectively separate and dispose of CMPAF. For
cattle producers, who are also impacted by this regulation, this may
mean finding alternative means of disposing of dead stock cattle if
rendering services are no longer available to them.

    FDA acknowledges that carcass disposal problems exist in certain
states or regions and that developing and implementing adequate
solutions to these problems is challenging. Furthermore, FDA recognizes
that in certain circumstances it may be particularly challenging to
address such disposal problems by the October 26, 2009, compliance
date. FDA intends to finalize the Draft Small Entities Compliance Guide
for Renderers that was issued on November 26, 2008. In addition, FDA
intends to engage in further outreach to the rendering industry,
pertinent State agencies, and others affected by the rule. FDA is
committed to working with all affected parties to the extent possible
to assist efforts in mitigating the impacts associated with
implementation of the rule.

IV. Conclusion

    At this time, the agency is confirming the April 27, 2009,
effective date of the final rule published in the Federal Register of
April 25, 2008, entitled ``Substances Prohibited From Use in Animal
Food or Feed.'' The agency is also establishing a compliance date of
October 26, 2009, for this rule in order to allow additional time for
affected persons to comply with the new requirements.

    Dated: April 21, 2009.
Jeffrey Shuren,
Associate Commissioner for Policy and Planning.
[FR Doc. E9-9466 Filed 4-22-09; 11:15 am]

BILLING CODE 4160-01-S


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 58 (Tuesday, March 26, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 18334]
[FR Doc No: 2013-06821]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER13-1124-000]

New York Independent System Operator, Inc.; Notice of Motion for
Tariff Waiver and Expedited Action

    On March 15, 2013, New York Independent System Operator, Inc.
(NYISO) filed a motion for limited tariff waivers of section 5.16.4
and, to the extent necessary, section 5.16.3 of its Market
Administration and Control Area Services Tariff (Services Tariff).
First, NYISO seeks a limited waiver of section 5.16.4 of its Services
Tariff to give it an extra thirty (30) calendar days, i.e., until April
30, 2013, to comply with the requirement that it report on the results
of the New Capacity Zone Study and submit tariff revisions to
``establish and recognize'' one or more New Capacity Zones (NCZ). The
filing is presently due on or before March 31, 2013. Second, to the
extent necessary, NYISO requests a limited waiver of the Services
Tariff section 5.16.3 deadline regarding the establishment of the
Indicative NCZ Locational Minimum Installed Capacity Requirement. NYISO
also requests a shortened comment period on the requested waiver and
expedited consideration of the request.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in this proceeding must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and Sec.  385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m.
Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered,
but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on March 25, 2013.

    Dated: March 19, 2013.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-06821 Filed 3-25-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 102 (Wednesday, May 28, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30688-30689]
[FR Doc No: 2014-12270]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2013-0125; Notice 2]

Hankook Tire America Corp, Grant of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance

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

ACTION: Grant of Petition.

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

SUMMARY: Hankook Tire America Corp, (Hankook) has determined that
certain model year Hankook Roadhandler Sport (H432) tires manufactured
between June 21, 2013 and August 29, 2013, do not fully comply with
paragraph S5.5(f) of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS)
No.139, New Pneumatic Radial Tires for Light Vehicles. Hankook has
filed an appropriate report dated October 4, 2013, pursuant to 49 CFR
part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports.

ADDRESSES: For further information on this decision contact Abraham
Diaz, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, facsimile
(202) 366-5930.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    I. Hankook's Petition: Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h)
(see implementing rule at 49 CFR part 556), Hankook submitted a
petition for an exemption from the notification and remedy requirements
of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the basis that this noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
    Notice of receipt of the October 4, 2013, petition was published,
with a 30-day public comment period, on December 10, 2013 in the
Federal Register (78 FR 74226). No comments were received. To view the
petition and all supporting documents log onto the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Web site at: http://www.regulations.gov/. Then
follow the online search instructions to locate docket number ``NHTSA-
2013-0125.''
    II. Tires Involved: Affected are approximately 6,257 Roadhandler
Sport (H432), size 215/45R17 91W XL, Hankook tires manufactured between
June, 21, 2013 and August 29, 2013.
    III. Noncompliance: Hankook explains that the noncompliance is
that, due to a mold labeling error, the sidewall marking on the side of
the tires incorrectly describes the actual number of plies in the tread
area of the tires as required by paragraph S5.5(f) of 49 CFR 571.139.
Specifically, the tires in question were inadvertently manufactured
with ``Ply Tread 2 steel + 1 Polyester + 2 Nylon, Sidewall 1
Polyester.'' The correct labeling and stamping to match the tire
construction should have been ``Ply Tread 2 steel + 1 Polyester + 1
Nylon, Sidewall 1 Polyester.''
    IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S5.5(f) of FMVSS No. 139 requires in
pertinent part:

    S5.5 Tire Markings. Except as specified in paragraphs (a)
through (i) of S5.5, each tire must be marked on each sidewall with
the information specified in S5.5(a) through (d) and on one side-
wall with the information specified in S5.5(e) through (i) according
to the phase-in schedule specified in S7 of this standard. The
markings must be placed between the maximum section width and the
bead on at least one sidewall, unless the maximum section width of
the tire is located in an area that is not more than one-fourth of
the distance from the bead to the shoulder of the tire. If the
maximum section width that falls within that area, those markings
must appear between the bead and a point one-half the distance from
the bead to the shoulder of the tire, on at least one sidewall. The
markings must be in letters and numerals not less than 0.078 inches
high and raised above or sunk below the tire surface not less than
0.015 inches . . .
    (f) The actual number of plies in the sidewall, and the actual
number of plies in the tread area, if different.

    V. Summary of Hankook's Analyses: Hankook stated its belief that
the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety
for the following reasons:
    1. The affected subject tires meet or exceed all applicable FMVSS
performance standards.
    2. The subject tires will not be affected based on performance,
durability, or safety they are designed and build for.
    Hancock has additionally informed NHTSA that it has corrected the

noncompliance so that all future production of these Roadhandler Sport
(H432) tires will comply with FMVSS No. 139.
    In summation, Hankook believes that the described noncompliance of
the subject tires is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety, and that
its petition, to exempt from providing recall notification of
noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118 and remedying the recall
noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120 should be granted.
    VI. NHTSA's Decision: The agency agrees with Hankook that the
noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. The agency
believes that the true measure of inconsequentiality to motor vehicle
safety in this case is that there is no effect of the noncompliance on
the operational safety of the vehicles on which these tires are
mounted. The safety of people working in the tire retread, repair and
recycling industries must also be considered.
    Although tire construction affects the strength and durability,
neither the agency nor the tire industry provides information relating
tire strength and durability to the number of plies and types of ply
cord material in the tread and sidewall. Therefore, tire dealers and
customers should consider the tire construction information along with
other information such as load capacity, maximum inflation pressure,
and tread wear, temperature, and traction ratings, to assess
performance capabilities of various tires. In the agency's judgment,
the incorrect labeling of the tire construction information will have
an inconsequential effect on motor vehicle safety because most
consumers do not base tire purchases or vehicle operation parameters on
the number of plies in a tire.
    The agency believes the noncompliance will have no measurable
effect on the safety of tire retread, repair, and recycling industries.
The use of steel cord construction in the sidewall and tread is the
primary safety concern of these industries. In this case, since the
tire sidewall is marked correctly for the number of steel plies, this
potential safety concern does not exist.
    In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Hankook
has met its burden of persuasion that the noncompliance described is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Hankook's
petition is granted and the petitioner is exempted from the obligation
of providing notification of, and remedy for, the subject
noncompliance.
    NHTSA notes that the statutory provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to file petitions for a
determination of inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to exempt manufacturers
only from the duties found in sections 30118 and 30120, respectively,
to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or noncompliance
and to remedy the defect or noncompliance. Therefore, this decision
only applies to the subject tires that Hankook no longer controlled at
the time that it determined that a noncompliance existed. However, the
granting of this petition does not relieve tire distributors and
dealers of the prohibitions on the sale, offer for sale, or
introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate commerce of
the noncompliant tires under their control after Hankook notified them
that the subject noncompliance existed.

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

Jeffrey M. Giuseppe,
Acting Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2014-12270 Filed 5-27-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P