[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 32 (Friday, February 15, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 11126-11129]
[FR Doc No: 2013-03600]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0023; FRL-9378-4]

Receipt of Several Pesticide Petitions Filed for Residues of
Pesticide Chemicals in or on Various Commodities

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of filing of petitions and request for comment.

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

SUMMARY: This document announces the Agency's receipt of several
initial filings of pesticide petitions requesting the establishment or
modification of regulations for residues of pesticide chemicals in or
on various commodities.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 18, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number and the pesticide petition number (PP) of interest as shown
in the body of this document, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.htm.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A contact person, with telephone
number and email address, is listed at the end of each pesticide
petition summary. You may also reach each contact person by mail at
Registration Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural

producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer. The following
list of North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes
is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide to help
readers determine whether this document applies to them. Potentially
affected entities may include:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
    If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this
action to a particular entity, consult the person listed at the end of
the pesticide petition summary of interest.

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

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in 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.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
    3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to achieve environmental
justice, the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of any group,
including minority and/or low-income populations, in the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies. To help address potential environmental justice issues, the
Agency seeks information on any groups or segments of the population
who, as a result of their location, cultural practices, or other
factors, may have atypical or disproportionately high and adverse human
health impacts or environmental effects from exposure to the pesticides
discussed in this document, compared to the general population.

II. What action is the agency taking?

    EPA is announcing its receipt of several pesticide petitions filed
under section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA),
(21 U.S.C. 346a), requesting the establishment or modification of
regulations in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of pesticide chemicals in
or on various food commodities. The Agency is taking public comment on
the requests before responding to the petitioners. EPA is not proposing
any particular action at this time. EPA has determined that the
pesticide petitions described in this document contain the data or
information prescribed in FFDCA section 408(d)(2); however, EPA has not
fully evaluated the sufficiency of the submitted data at this time or
whether the data support granting of the pesticide petitions. After
considering the public comments, EPA intends to evaluate whether and
what action may be warranted. Additional data may be needed before EPA
can make a final determination on these pesticide petitions.
    Pursuant to 40 CFR 180.7(f), a summary of each of the petitions
that are the subject of this document, prepared by the petitioner, is
included in a docket EPA has created for each rulemaking. The docket
for each of the petitions is available online at http://www.regulations.gov.
    As specified in FFDCA section 408(d)(3), (21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3)),
EPA is publishing notice of the petition so that the public has an
opportunity to comment on this request for the establishment or
modification of regulations for residues of pesticides in or on food
commodities. Further information on the petition may be obtained
through the petition summary referenced in this unit.

New Tolerances

    1. PP 2E8107. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0899). Interregional Research
Project Number 4 (IR-4), 500 College Road East, Suite 201W., Princeton,
NJ 08540, requests to establish tolerances in 40 CFR part 180 for
residues of the insecticide fenpropathrin, alpha-cyano-3-phenoxybenzyl
2,2,3,3-tetramethylcyclopropanecarboxylate, in or on barley, grain at
0.04 parts per million (ppm); barley, hay at 3.0 ppm; barley, straw at
2.0 ppm; vegetable, fruiting, group 8-10 at 1.0 ppm; fruit, citrus,
group 10-10 at 2.0 ppm; fruit, pome, group 11-10 at 5.0 ppm; bushberry
subgroup 13-07B at 3.0 ppm; fruit, vine climbing, except fuzzy
kiwifruit, subgroup 13-07F at 5.0 ppm; and berry, low growing, subgroup
13-07G at 2.0 ppm. Adequate analytical methodology is available to
detect and quantify fenpropathrin at residue levels in numerous
matrices. The methods use solvent extraction and partition and/or
column chromatography clean-up steps, followed by separation and
quantitation using capillary gas liquid chromatography (GLC) with flame
ionization detector (FID). Contact: Andrew Ertman,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    2. PP 2E8119. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0949). Interregional Research
Project Number 4 (IR-4), 500 College Road East, Suite 201W., Princeton,
NJ 08540, requests to establish tolerances in 40 CFR part 180 for
residues of the fungicide triflumizole, [1-[1-((4-chloro-2-
(trifluoromethyl) phenyl)imino)-2propoxyethyl]-1H-imidazole] in or on
tomato at 1.5 ppm; fruit, pome, group 11-10 at 0.5 ppm; fruit, small,
vine climbing, except fuzzy kiwifruit, subgroup 13-07F at 2.5 ppm; and
berry, low growing, subgroup, 13-07G at 2.0 ppm. The analytical method
is suitable for analyzing crops for residues of triflumizole and its
aniline containing metabolites at the proposed tolerance levels.
Residue levels of triflumizole are converted to FA-1-1 by acidic and
alkaline reflux, followed by distillation. Residues are then extracted
and subjected to solid phase extraction (SPE) purification. Detection
and quantitation are conducted by gas chromatograph equipped with
nitrogen phosphorus detector (GC/NPD), electron capture detector (ECD)
or mass spectrometry detection (MSD). Contact: Andrew Ertman, (703)
308-9367, email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

    3. PP 2E8125. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0014). Bayer CropScience, 2 T.W.
Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, requests to
establish tolerances in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of the herbicide
indaziflam, (N-[(1R, 2S)-2,3-dihydro-2,6-dimethyl-1H-inden-1-yl-1,3,5-
triazine-2,4-diamine]-6-(1-fluoroethyl)) and its fluoroethyl-indaziflam
metabolite, each expressed as the parent compound, in or on banana at
0.01 ppm; coffee at 0.01 ppm; and palm oil at 0.03 ppm. Indaziflam,
residues are quantified in raw agricultural commodities by high
pressure liquid chromatography/triple stage quadrupole mass
spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) using the stable isotopically labeled analytes
as internal standards. Contact: Maggie Rudick,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    4. PP 2F8055. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0010). KIM-C1, LLC, 2547 West Shaw
Avenue, Suite 116, Fresno, CA 93711, requests to establish temporary
tolerances in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of the plant growth
regulator forchlorfenuron, N-(2-chloro-4-pyridinyl-N'-phenylurea, in or
on almond; cherry, sweet; fig; pear; pistachio; plum; prune at 0.01
ppm; and the processed commodity almond, hulls at 0.15 ppm. The visible
ultraviolet (UV) detector and mass spectrophotometer (MS) detector are
used to measure and evaluate the chemical forchlorfenuron. Contact:
Marcel Howard,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    5. PP 2F8086. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0919). Dow AgroSciences (DAS), LLC,
9330 Zionsville Road, Indianapolis, IN 46268, requests to establish
tolerances in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of the herbicide halauxifen-
methyl, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the
commodities listed below. Compliance with the tolerance levels
specified is to be determined by measuring the combined residues of
halauxifen-methyl (Methyl 4-amino-3-chloro-6-(4-chloro-2-fluoro-3-
methoxyphenyl)pyridine-2-carboxylate) and halauxifen (4-amino-3-chloro-
6-(4-chloro-2-fluoro-3-methoxyphenyl) pyridine-2-carboxylic acid)
expressed as halauxifen-methyl (parent) equivalents, in or on barley,
grain at 0.01 ppm; barley, hay at 0.01 ppm; barley, straw at 0.01 ppm;
cattle, fat at 0.01 ppm; cattle, meat at 0.01 ppm; cattle, meat
byproducts at 0.01 ppm; goat, fat at 0.01 ppm; goat, meat at 0.01 ppm;
goat, meat byproducts at 0.01 ppm; horse, fat at 0.01 ppm; horse, meat
at 0.01 ppm; horse, meat byproducts at 0.01 ppm; milk at 0.01 ppm;
sheep, fat at 0.01 ppm; sheep, meat at 0.01 ppm; sheep, meat byproducts
at 0.01 ppm; wheat, forage at 0.5 ppm; wheat, grain at 0.01 ppm; wheat,
hay at 0.04 ppm; wheat, straw at 0.015 ppm. The residue profile of
halauxifen-methyl and halauxifen is adequately understood and an
acceptable analytical method is available for enforcement purposes. The
DAS analytical method study number 110004 outlining the ``Method
Validation for the Determination of Residues of Halauxifen-methyl
Ester, and Halauxifen in Agricultural Commodities, and Wheat Processed
Products using Offline Solid-Phase Extraction, and Liquid
Chromatography with Mass Spectrometry Detection'' was validated on a
variety of plant matrices. Contact: Maggie Rudick,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    6. PP 2F8104. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0011). KIM-C1, LLC, 2547 West Shaw
Avenue, Suite 116, Fresno, CA 93711, requests to establish tolerances
in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of the plant growth regulator
forchlorfenuron, N-(2-chloro-4-pyridinyl-N'-phenylurea, in or on
almond; cherry, sweet; fig; pear; pistachio; plum; and prune at 0.04
ppm and the processed commodity almond, hulls, at 0.15 ppm. The UV
detector and MS detector are used to measure and evaluate the chemical
forchlorfenuron. Contact: Marcel Howard,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    7. PP 2F8120. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0008). Dow AgroSciences, 9330
Zionsville Road, Indianapolis, IN 46268, requests to establish
tolerances in 40 CFR part 180 for combined residues of the
aminopyralid, (XDE-750: 4-amino-3,6-dichloropyridine-2-carboxylic acid)
and its glucose conjugate, expressed as total parent, in or on fish--
shellfish, mollusc at 0.01 ppm; fish--shellfish, crustacean at 0.01
ppm; fish--freshwater finfish at 0.04 ppm. Adequate analytical methods
for enforcement purposes are available to monitor residues of
aminopyralid in fish and shellfish. The analytical method GRM 07.08
uses liquid chromatography and positive ion electrospray tandem
spectrometry (LC/MS/MS). Contact: Bethany Benbow,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    8. PP 2F8135. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0051). Syngenta Crop Protection,
LLC., P.O. Box 18300, Greensboro, NC 27419-8300, requests to establish
a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of the fungicide
propiconazole, 1-[[2-(2,4-dichlorophenyl)-4-propyl-1,3-dioxolan-2-yl]
methyl]-1H-1,2,4-triazole, and its metabolites determined as 2,4,-
dichlorobenzoic acid and expressed as parent compound, in or on
rapeseed subgroup 20A at 0.3 ppm. The metabolism data in plants and
animals suggest that analytical methods to detect either the phenyl or
the triazole ring would be appropriate for the measurement of residues.
However, because of the natural occurrence of compounds that interfere
with the measurement of triazoles, methods designed to detect this
moiety have been proven unreliable and unacceptable. Conversely,
conversion of phenyl moiety to 2,4-dichlorobenzoic acid (DCBA) has
proven to be satisfactory for all agricultural products analyzed to
date. Analytical methods AG-626 and AG-454A were developed for the
determination of residues of propiconazole and its metabolites
containing the DCBA moiety. Analytical method AG-626 has been accepted
and published by EPA as the tolerance enforcement method for crops.
Contact: Erin Malone,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Amended Tolerances

    1. PP 2E8107. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0899). Interregional Research
Project Number 4 (IR-4), 500 College Road East, Suite 201W., Princeton,
NJ 08540, requests to amend the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.466 for
residues of the insecticide fenpropathrin, alpha-cyano-3-phenoxybenzyl
2,2,3,3-tetramethylcyclopropane-carboxylate, by removing the
established tolerances in or on the following commodities and crop
groups: Vegetable, fruiting, group 8; fruit, citrus, group 10; fruit,
pome, group 11; bushberry subgroup 13B; Juneberry; salal; grape; and
strawberry, upon approval of the proposed tolerances listed under ``New
Tolerance'' for PP 2E8107. Contact: Andrew Ertman,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    2. PP 2F8129. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0015). BASF Corporation, 26 Davis
Drive, P.O. Box 13528, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-3528, requests
to amend 40 CFR 180.649 by amending tolerances for residues of
saflufenacil, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the
raw agricultural commodities rice straw at 0.30 ppm. In addition, the
current commodity definition, ``Grain, cereal, forage, fodder and straw
group 16'' would be revised to ``Grain, cereal, forage, fodder and
straw group 16 (except rice straw)''. Compliance with the tolerances
levels is to be determined by measuring only the sum of saflufenacil,
2-chloro-5-[3,6-dihydro-3-methyl-2,6-dioxo-4-(trifluoromethyl)-1(2H)-
pyrimidinyl]-4-fluoro-N-[[methyl(1-methylethyl) amino]
sulfonyl]benzamide, and its metabolites N-[2-chloro-5-(2,6-dioxo-4-

(trifluoromethyl)-3,6-dihydro-1(2H)-pyrimidinyl)-4-fluorobenzoyl]-N'-
isopropyl sulfamide and N-[4-chloro-2-fluoro-5-
(([(isopropylamino)sulfonyl]amino)carbonyl) phenyl]urea, calculated as
the stoichiometric equivalent of saflufenacil, in or on the
commodities. Adequate enforcement methodology (liquid chromatography/
mass spectrometry/mass spectrometry (LCMS/MS) methods D0603/02 (plants)
and L0073/01 (livestock)) is available to enforce the tolerance
expression. Contact: Bethany Benbow,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
New Tolerance Exemptions

    1. PP IN-10524. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0908). Ecolab, Inc., 370 N.
Wabasha Street, St. Paul, MN 55102, requests to establish an exemption
from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of Sorbitan, mono-9-
octadecenoate, poly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl) derivs., (Z)- (CAS No. 9005-65-
6) when used as a pesticide inert ingredient in antimicrobial pesticide
formulations applied to food-contact surfaces in public eating places,
dairy processing equipment, and food processing equipment, and utensils
in accordance with 40 CFR 180.940(a). The petitioner believes no
analytical method is needed because it is not applicable to this inert
ingredient petition. Contact: Lisa Austin,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    2. PP IN-10527. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0003). Ecolab, Inc., 370 N.
Wabasha Street, St. Paul, MN 55102, requests to establish an exemption
from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of FD&C Green No. 3,
Disodium salt, (CAS No. 2353-45-9) when used as a pesticide inert
ingredient in antimicrobial pesticide formulations applied to food-
contact surfaces in public eating places, dairy processing equipment,
and food processing equipment, and utensils in accordance with 40 CFR
180.940(a). The petitioner believes no analytical method is needed
because it is not applicable to this inert ingredient petition.
Contact: Elizabeth Fertich,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. PP IN-10540. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0043). AgroFresh, Inc., 727
Norristown Road, Spring House, PA 19477-0904, requests to establish an
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of Styrene-
ethylene-propylene block copolymer (CAS No. 108388-87-0), number
average molecular weight greater than 100,000 daltons in or on all raw
agricultural commodities under 40 CFR 180.960 when used as a suspension
agent in agricultural formulations. The petitioner believes no
analytical method is needed based on the fact that this information is
generally not required when all criteria for polymer exemption are met
and when petitioning for an exemption from the requirements of a
tolerance without any numerical limitations. Contact: David Lieu, (703)
305-0079, email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    4. PP 2E8040. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0057). Advanced Polymer Technology,
109 Conica Lane, P.O. Box 160, Harmony, PA 16037, requests to establish
an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of castor
oil, polymer with adipic acid, linoleic acid, oleic acid, and
ricinoleic acid, (CAS No. 1357486-09-9) 3,748 amu under 40 CFR 180.960
when used as an inert ingredient in pesticide formulations as a
solubilizer without limitations. Advanced Polymer Technology is
petitioning that castor oil, polymer with adipic acid, linoleic acid,
oleic acid and ricinoleic acid be exempt from the requirement of a
tolerance based upon the definition of a low-risk polymer under 40 CFR
723.250. Therefore, an analytical method to determine residues on
treated crops is not relevant. Contact: David Lieu,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

    Environmental protection, Agricultural commodities, Feed additives,
Food additives, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    Dated: February 7, 2013.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. 2013-03600 Filed 2-14-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: March 13, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 48)]
[Notices]
[Page 10984-10985]
[DOCID:fr13mr09-118]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Petition for Exemption From the Vehicle Theft Prevention
Standard; Volkswagen

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

ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.

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

SUMMARY: This document grants in full the petition of Volkswagen Group
of America (VW) in accordance with 543.9(c)(2) of 49 CFR part 543,
Exemption from the Theft Prevention Standard, for the Audi A3 vehicle
line beginning with model year (MY) 2010. This petition is granted
because the agency has determined that the antitheft device to be
placed on the line as standard equipment is likely to be as effective
in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance with the
parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard.

DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with
model year (MY) 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Carlita Ballard, Office of
International Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer Programs, NHTSA, 1200
New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building, W43-439, Washington, DC 20590.
Ms. Ballard's phone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Her fax number is (202)
493-2990.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a petition dated November 10, 2008, VW
requested an exemption from the parts-marking requirements of the Theft
Prevention Standard (49 CFR part 541) for the Audi A3 vehicle line
beginning with MY 2010. The petition requested an exemption from parts-
marking pursuant to 49 CFR part 543, Exemption from Vehicle Theft
Prevention Standard, based on the installation of an antitheft device
as standard equipment for an entire vehicle line.
    Under 543.5(a), a manufacturer may petition NHTSA to grant an
exemption for one vehicle line per model year. In its petition, VW
provided a detailed description and diagram of the identity, design,
and location of the components of the antitheft device for its new Audi
A3 vehicle line. VW will install its passive, transponder-based,
electronic immobilizer antitheft device as standard equipment on its
Audi A3 vehicle line beginning with MY 2010. Key components of the
antitheft device will include a passive immobilizer, an immobilizer
control unit, a mechanical ignition lock with immobilizer reading coil,
an adapted ignition key, and an engine control unit. The antitheft
device will not include an audible or visible alarm feature as standard
equipment. VW's submission is considered a complete petition as
required by 49 CFR 543.7, in that it meets the general requirements
contained in 543.5 and the specific content requirements of 543.6.
    VW stated that once the driver/operator turns on the ignition, the
key transponder sends a fixed code to the immobilizer control unit. If
this is identified as the correct code, a variable code is generated in
the immobilizer control unit and sent to the transponder. A secret
arithmetic process is then started in the transponder and the control
unit according to a set of specific equations. The results of the
computing process is evaluated in the control unit and if they tally,
the vehicle key is acknowledged as correct. The engine control unit
then sends a variable code to the immobilizer control unit, enabling
start up of the vehicle. VW stated that a new variable code is
generated each time during this secret computing process. Therefore, VW
believes that the code is undecipherable and impossible to duplicate.
    In addressing the specific content requirements of 543.6, VW
provided information on the reliability and durability of its proposed
device. To ensure reliability and durability of the device, VW
conducted tests based on its own specified standards. VW provided a
detailed list of the tests conducted (i.e., electrical system
temperature stability, mechanical integrity, electrical performance,
environmental compatibility and service life) and believes that the
device is reliable and durable since the device complied with its
specific requirements for each test. Additionally, VW stated that after
adapting in the electronic module of the key transponder has been
initiated, a pairing between the key and the immobilizer occurs at
which point the key can no longer be used for any other immobilizer.
    In supplementary information submitted to the agency on January 12,
2009, VW stated that since the Audi A3 has only been equipped with a
standard immobilizer and alarm since its introduction in MY 2006, there
is no comparative Audi data available for the Audi A3 without an
immobilizer. VW also stated that the agency's MY 2006 theft data
published in the Federal Register on October 14, 2008, reported that
the Audi A3 had a theft rate of 1.0751 which is below the median. VW
also provided data on the theft reduction benefits experienced by other
vehicle lines installed with immobilizer devices that have recently
been granted petitions for exemptions by the agency. VW has concluded
that the antitheft device proposed for its Audi A3 vehicle line is no
less effective than those devices in the lines for which NHTSA has
already granted full exemption from the parts-marking requirements. The
agency agrees that the device is substantially similar to devices in
these and other vehicle lines for which the agency has already granted
exemptions.
    Based on the evidence submitted by VW, the agency believes that the
antitheft device for the Audi A3 vehicle line is likely to be as
effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance
with the part-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard.
    Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49 CFR 543.7(b), the agency grants
a petition for exemption from the parts-marking requirements of part
541 either in whole or in part, if it determines that, based upon
substantial evidence, the standard equipment antitheft device is likely
to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as
compliance with the parts marking requirements of part 541. The agency
finds that VW has provided adequate reasons for its belief that the
antitheft device for the Audi A3 vehicle line is likely to be as
effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance
with the parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard
(49 CFR part 541). This conclusion is based on the information VW
provided about its device.
    The agency concludes that the device will provide four of the five
types of performance listed in 543.6(a)(3): Promoting activation;
preventing defeat or circumvention of the device by unauthorized
persons; preventing operation of the vehicle by unauthorized entrants;
and ensuring the reliability and durability of the device.

    For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full VW's
petition for exemption for the Audi A3 vehicle line from the parts-
marking requirements of 49 CFR part 541. The agency notes that 49 CFR
part 541, Appendix A-1, identifies those lines that are exempted from
the Theft Prevention Standard for a given model year. 49 CFR part
543.7(f) contains publication requirements incident to the disposition
of all part 543 petitions. Advanced listing, including the release of
future product nameplates, the beginning model year for which the
petition is granted and a general description of the antitheft device
is necessary in order to notify law enforcement agencies of new vehicle
lines exempted from the parts-marking requirements of the Theft
Prevention Standard.
    If VW decides not to use the exemption for this line, it must
formally notify the agency. If such a decision is made, the line must
be fully marked according to the requirements under 49 CFR parts 541.5
and 541.6 (marking of major component parts and replacement parts).
    NHTSA notes that if VW wishes in the future to modify the device on
which this exemption is based, the company may have to submit a
petition to modify the exemption. Part 543.7(d) states that a part 543
exemption applies only to vehicles that belong to a line exempted under
this part and equipped with the anti-theft device on which the line's
exemption is based. Further, part 543.9(c)(2) provides for the
submission of petitions ``to modify an exemption to permit the use of
an antitheft device similar to but differing from the one specified in
that exemption.''
    The agency wishes to minimize the administrative burden that part
543.9(c)(2) could place on exempted vehicle manufacturers and itself.
The agency did not intend in drafting part 543 to require the
submission of a modification petition for every change to the
components or design of an antitheft device. The significance of many
such changes could be de minimis. Therefore, NHTSA suggests that if the
manufacturer contemplates making any changes, the effects of which
might be characterized as de minimis, it should consult the agency
before preparing and submitting a petition to modify.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 33106; delegation of authority at 49 CFR
1.50.

    Issued on: March 10, 2009.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
 [FR Doc. E9-5477 Filed 3-12-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 179 (Friday, September 16, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 56891-56893]
[FR Doc No: 2022-19957]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R06-OAR-2020-0161; FRL-10173-01-R6]

Air Plan Approval; Texas; Revised Emissions Inventory for the
Dallas-Fort Worth Ozone Nonattainment Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act), the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving revisions to the
Texas State Implementation Plan (SIP) applicable to the Dallas-Fort
Worth (DFW) serious ozone nonattainment area for the 2008 ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). Specifically, the EPA is
approving a revised 2011 base year emissions inventory (EI) for the DFW
area.

DATES: This rule is effective on October 17, 2022.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-R06-OAR-2020-0161. All documents in the docket are
listed on

the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business
Information or other information whose disclosure is restricted by
statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not
placed on the internet. Publicly available docket materials are
available electronically through https://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Clovis Steib, EPA Region 6 Office,
Infrastructure & Ozone Section,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected]. Out
of an abundance of caution for members of the public and our staff, the
EPA Region 6 office may be closed to the public to reduce the risk of
transmitting COVID-19. Please call or email the contact listed above if
you need alternative access to material indexed but not provided in the
docket.

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

I. Background

    The background for this action is discussed in detail in our
October 9, 2020, proposal (85 FR 64084). In that document we proposed
to approve the Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) demonstration and
associated motor vehicle emission budgets, contingency measures should
the area fail to make RFP emissions reductions or attain the 2008 ozone
NAAQS by the applicable attainment date, and a revised 2011 base year
EI for the DFW area. In the October 2020 proposal, we also described
the status of the adequacy determination for the DFW nitrogen oxides
(NOX) and volatile organic compounds (VOC) Motor Vehicle
Emission Budgets (MVEBs) for 2020 in accordance with 40 CFR
93.118(f)(2).
    Our October 2020 proposal provided a detailed description of the
revisions and the rationale for the EPA's proposed actions, together
with a discussion of the opportunity to comment. The public comment
period for our October 2020 proposal action closed on November 9, 2020.
We received comments during the public comment period from two sources:
Air Law for All, Ltd. (ALFA), on behalf of the Center for Biological
Diversity and the Sierra Club; and the North Central Texas Council of
Governments (NCTCOG). The comments received from the NCTCOG were
supportive of the October 2020 proposal. The comments received from
ALFA were adverse and addressed all elements in the October 2020
proposal, except the 2011 revised base year EI. The comments received
are available for review in the docket for this rulemaking. The EPA is
only finalizing the proposed approval of revisions that address the
revised 2011 base year EI at this time. The other elements described in
the October 2020 proposal will be addressed in a separate rulemaking.

II. Environmental Justice Considerations

    Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions to Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629,
Feb. 16, 1994) directs Federal agencies to identify and address
``disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects'' of their actions on minority populations and low-income
populations to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law.
The EPA defines environmental justice (EJ) as ``the fair treatment and
meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color,
national origin, or income with respect to the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies.'' \1\ The EPA further defines the term fair treatment to mean
that ``no group of people should bear a disproportionate burden of
environmental harms and risks, including those resulting from the
negative environmental consequences of industrial, governmental, and
commercial operations or programs and policies.'' \2\ For this final
action, the EPA conducted screening analyses using the EJScreen
(Version 2.0) tool. We conducted the analyses for the purpose of
providing information to the public, not as a basis of our proposed
action. The EJScreen analysis reports are available in the docket for
this rulemaking. The EPA found, based on the EJScreen analyses, that
this final action will not have disproportionately high or adverse
human health or environmental effects on communities with EJ concerns,
as the changes to the EI will result in a more accurate EI for the area
upon which the State and EPA can assess the RFP Plan requirements for
the DFW area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See https://www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/learn-about-environmental-justice.
    \2\ https://www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/learn-about-environmental-justice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Final Action

    We are approving revisions to the Texas SIP that address the base
year EI requirements for the DFW serious ozone nonattainment area for
the 2008 ozone NAAQS. Specifically, we are approving the revised 2011
base year EI for the DFW area. The EI we are approving is provided in
the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality's (TCEQ) revisions to the
Texas SIP submitted on May 13, 2020, and in Table 1 of our October 2020
proposal.\3\ We are approving the EI because it contains a
comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of actual emissions for
all relevant sources in accordance with CAA sections 172(c)(3) and
182(a)(1). Texas adopted the EIs consistent with the requirement for
reasonable public notice and opportunity for a public hearing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 85 FR 64084.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because

application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the CAA;
and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by November 15, 2022. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: September 9, 2022.
Earthea Nance,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Environmental
Protection Agency amends 40 CFR part 52 as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart SS--Texas

0
2. In Sec.  52.2270(e), the table titled ``EPA Approved Nonregulatory
Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures in the Texas SIP'' is amended
by adding the entry ``Revised 2011 Base Year Emissions Inventory'' at
the end of the table to read as follows:

Sec.  52.2270  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

              EPA Approved Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures in the Texas SIP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Applicable
                                  geographic or   State submittal/   EPA approval
     Name of SIP provision       non-attainment       effective          date                  Comments
                                      area              date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Revised 2011 Base Year          Collin, Dallas,         3/4/2020   9/16/2022,        ...........................
 Emissions Inventory.            Denton, Ellis,                     [Insert Federal
                                 Johnson,                           Register
                                 Kaufman,                           citation].
                                 Parker,
                                 Rockwall,
                                 Tarrant, and
                                 Wise Counties,
                                 TX.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2022-19957 Filed 9-15-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 63 (Wednesday, April 2, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18605-18607]
[FR Doc No: 2014-07205]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2013-0126]

Qualification of Drivers; Application for Exemptions; Hearing

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of applications for exemptions; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces that 4 individuals have applied for a medical
exemption from the hearing requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Regulations (FMCSRs). In accordance with the statutory
requirements concerning applications for exemptions, FMCSA requests
public comments on these requests. The statute and implementing
regulations concerning exemptions require that exemptions must provide
an equivalent or greater level of safety than if they were not granted.
If the Agency determines the exemptions would satisfy the statutory
requirements and decides to grant theses requests after reviewing the
public comments submitted in response to this notice, the exemptions
would

enable 4 individuals to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 2, 2014.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket No. FMCSA-2013-0126 using any of the
following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 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: West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Instructions: Each submission must include the Agency name and the
docket numbers for this notice. Note that all comments received will be
posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading below
for further information.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., ET, Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The FDMS is available 24 hours each day, 365
days each year. If you want acknowledgment that we received your
comments, please include a self-addressed, stamped envelope or postcard
or print the acknowledgement page that appears after submitting
comments on-line.
    Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review DOT's Privacy Act Statement for the FDMS published in
the Federal Register on January 17, 2008 (73 FR 3316), or you may visit
http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/pdf/E8-785.pdf.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elaine M. Papp, Chief Medical
Programs,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA, Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W64-224, Washington,
DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration has authority to
grant exemptions from many of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Regulations (FMCSRs) under 49 U.S.C. 31315 and 31136(e), as amended by
Section 4007 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century
(TEA-21) (Pub. L. 105-178, June 9, 1998, 112 Stat. 107, 401). FMCSA has
published in 49 CFR part 381, subpart C final rules implementing the
statutory changes in its exemption procedures made by section 4007, 69
FR 51589 (August 20, 2004).\1\ Under the rules in part 381, subpart C,
FMCSA must publish a notice of each exemption request in the Federal
Register. The Agency must provide the public with an opportunity to
inspect the information relevant to the application, including any
safety analyses that have been conducted and any research reports,
technical papers and other publications referenced in the application.
The Agency must also provide an opportunity to submit public comment on
the applications for exemption.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ This action adopted as final rules the interim final rules
issued by FMCSA's predecessor in 1998 (63 FR 67600 (Dec. 8, 2008)),
and adopted by FMCSA in 2001 [66 FR 49867 (Oct. 1, 2001)].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Agency reviews the safety analyses and the public comments and
determines whether granting the exemption would likely achieve a level
of safety equivalent to or greater than the level that would be
achieved without the exemption. The decision of the Agency must be
published in the Federal Register. If the Agency denies the request, it
must state the reason for doing so. If the decision is to grant the
exemption, the notice must specify the person or class of persons
receiving the exemption and the regulatory provision or provisions from
which an exemption is granted. The notice must also specify the
effective period of the exemption (up to 2 years) and explain the terms
and conditions of the exemption. The exemption may be renewed.
    The current provisions of the FMCSRs concerning hearing state that
a person is physically qualified to drive a CMV if that person

    First perceives a forced whispered voice in the better ear at
not less than 5 feet with or without the use of a hearing aid or, if
tested by use of an audiometric device, does not have an average
hearing loss in the better ear greater than 40 decibels at 500 Hz,
1,000 Hz, and 2,000 Hz with or without a hearing aid when the
audiometric device is calibrated to American National Standard
(formerly ASA Standard) Z24.5--1951.

49 CFR 391.41(b)(11). This standard was adopted in 1970, with a
revision in 1971 to allow drivers to be qualified under this standard
while wearing a hearing aid, 35 FR 6458, 6463 (April 22, 1970) and 36
FR 12857 (July 3, 1971).
    FMCSA also issues instructions for completing the medical
examination report and includes advisory criteria on the report itself
to provide guidance for medical examiners in applying the hearing
standard. See 49 CFR 391.43(f). The current advisory criteria for the
hearing standard include a reference to a report entitled ``Hearing
Disorders and Commercial Motor Vehicle Drivers'' prepared for the
Federal Highway Administration, FMCSA's predecessor, in 1993.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ This report is available on the FMCSA Web site at http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/facts-research/research-technology/publications/medreport_archives.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

FMCSA Requests Comments on the Exemption Applications

    FMCSA requests comments from all interested parties on whether a
driver who cannot meet the hearing standard should be permitted to
operate a CMV in interstate commerce. Further, the Agency asks for
comments on whether a driver who cannot meet the hearing standard
should be limited to operating only certain types of vehicles in
interstate commerce, for example, vehicles without air brakes. The
statute and implementing regulations concerning exemptions require that
the Agency request public comments on all applications for exemptions.
The Agency is also required to make a determination that an exemption
would likely achieve a level of safety that is equivalent to, or
greater than, the level that would be achieved absent such exemption
before granting any such requests. 49 U.S.C. 31136 and 31315.

Submitting Comments

    You may submit your comments and material online or by fax, mail,
or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means. FMCSA
recommends that you include your name and a mailing address, an email
address, or a phone number in the body of your document so that FMCSA
can contact you if there are questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov and
in the search box insert the docket number

``FMCSA-2013-0126'' and click the search button. When the new screen
appears, click on the blue ``Comment Now!'' button on the right hand
side of the page. On the new page, enter information required including
the specific section of this document to which each comment applies,
and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation. If you
submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an
unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for
copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would
like to know that they reached the facility, please enclose a stamped,
self-addressed postcard or envelope.
    We will consider all comments and material received during the
comment period and may change this proposed rule based on your
comments. FMCSA may issue a final rule at any time after the close of
the comment period.

Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this
preamble, and to submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov and in the search box insert the docket number
``FMCSA-2013-0126'' and click ``Search.'' Next, click ``Open Docket
Folder'' and you will find all documents and comments related to the
proposed rulemaking.

Information on Individual Applicants

Rodney Braden

    Mr. Braden, 47, holds an operator's license in Kentucky.

Arthur Brown

    Mr. Brown, 46, holds an operator's license in Kentucky.

Anthony Castile, III

    Mr. Castile, 44, holds an operator's license in Pennsylvania.

Michael Steggs

    Mr. Steggs, 53, holds a Class A commercial driver's license (CDL)
in Texas.

Request for Comments

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b)(4), FMCSA
requests public comment from all interested persons on the exemption
petitions described in this notice. The Agency will consider all
comments received before the close of business May 2, 2014. Comments
will be available for examination in the docket at the location listed
under the ADDRESSES section of this notice. The Agency will file
comments received after the comment closing date in the public docket,
and will consider them to the extent practicable. In addition to late
comments, FMCSA will also continue to file, in the public docket,
relevant information that becomes available after the comment closing
date. Interested persons should monitor the public docket for new
material.

    Issued on: March 18, 2014.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2014-07205 Filed 4-1-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register: September 15, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 179)]
[Notices]
[Page 53314-53316]
[DOCID:fr15se08-128]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-58474; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2008-79]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Order Approving
Proposed Rule Change To List and Trade ELEMENTS\SM\ Linked to the CS/RT
Emerging Infrastructure Total Return Index Powered by HOLT\TM\ Due 2023

September 8, 2008.

I. Introduction

    On July 22, 2008, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``Exchange'' or ``NYSE Arca''),
through its wholly owned subsidiary, NYSE Arca Equities, Inc. (``NYSE
Arca Equities''), filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change to list and trade the ELEMENTS\TM\ Linked to the
CS/RT Emerging Infrastructure Total Return Index Powered by HOLT\TM\
due 2023. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the
Federal Register on August 7, 2008.\3\ The Commission received no
comment letters on the proposed rule change. This order approves the
proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58276 (July 31,
2008), 73 FR 46126.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposed to list and trade the ELEMENTS\SM\ Linked to
the CS/RT Emerging Infrastructure Total Return Index Powered by
HOLT\TM\ due 2023 (the ``Notes''), which are linked to the CS/RT
Emerging Infrastructure Total Return Index Powered by HOLT\TM\ (U.S.
dollar) (the ``Index''), under NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(6), which
includes the Exchange's listing standards for Equity Index-Linked
Securities.\4\ The Notes are senior unsecured debt obligations of
Credit Suisse, acting through its Nassau Branch (``Credit Suisse'').
The Index is comprised of 50 equally-weighted exchange-listed emerging
infrastructure-related companies that are chosen according to a rules-
based methodology for scoring stocks (each an ``Index Component'' and,
collectively, the ``Index Components''). The Index enables investors to
participate in the performance of a selection of companies that have a
focus on infrastructure, power and utilities, or agriculture and derive
at least 15% of their revenue from the Global Emerging Markets
(``GEM''). A GEM is defined as any country except the United States,
Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Hong Kong, Singapore, Austria,
Belgium, Luxembourg, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece,
Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, and
the United Kingdom.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Equity Index-Linked Securities are securities that provide
for the payment at maturity of a cash amount based on the
performance of an underlying index or indexes of equity securities
(``Equity Reference Asset''). See NYSE Arca Equities Rule
5.2(j)(6)(i).
    \5\ The Exchange stated that detailed descriptions of the Notes,
the Index (including the methodology used to determine the
composition of the Index), fees, redemption procedures and payment
at redemption, payment at maturity, taxes, and risk factors relating
to the Notes are available in the prospectus or on the Web site for
the Notes (http://www.credit-suisse.com), as applicable. See Credit
Suisse's prospectus, as amended, filed pursuant to Rule 424(b)(2)
under the Act (File No. 333-132936-14).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange submitted the proposed rule change because the Index
does not meet all of the ``generic'' listing requirements of NYSE Arca
Equities Rule 5.2(j)(6) applicable to the listing of Equity Index-
Linked Securities. Specifically, the Index meets all such requirements
except for those set forth in NYSE Arca Equities Rule
5.2(j)(6)(B)(I)(1)(b)(v).\6\ The Exchange represented that: (1) Except
for NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(6)(B)(I)(1)(b)(v), the Notes
currently satisfy all of the generic listing standards under NYSE Arca
Equities Rule 5.2(j)(6) applicable to Equity Index-Linked Securities;
(2) the continued listing standards under NYSE Arca Equities Rule
5.2(j)(6) applicable to Equity Index-Linked Securities shall apply to
the Notes; and (3) Credit Suisse is required to comply with Rule 10A-3
under the Act \7\ for the initial and continued listing of the Notes.
In addition, the Exchange represented that the Notes will comply with
all other requirements applicable to Equity Index-Linked Securities
including, but not limited to, requirements relating to the
dissemination of key information such as the Equity Reference Asset
value, rules and policies governing the trading of equity securities,
trading hours, trading halts, surveillance, firewalls, and Information
Bulletins to ETP Holders, as set forth in prior Commission orders
approving the generic listing rules applicable to the listing and
trading of Index-Linked Securities, generally, and Equity Index-Linked
Securities, in particular.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(6)(B)(I)(1)(b)(v) provides
that all component securities of the underlying index shall be
either (A) securities (other than foreign country securities and
American Depository Receipts (``ADRs'')) that are (x) issued by an
Act reporting company or by an investment company registered under
the Investment Company Act of 1940, which, in each case, are listed
on a national securities exchange, and (y) an ``NMS stock'' (as
defined in Rule 600 of Regulation NMS) or (B) foreign country
securities or ADRs, provided that foreign country securities or
foreign country securities underlying ADRs having their primary
trading market outside the United States on foreign trading markets
that are not members of the Intermarket Surveillance Group (``ISG'')
or parties to comprehensive surveillance sharing agreements with the
Exchange will not in the aggregate represent more than 20% of the
dollar weight of the index. See Securities Exchange Act Release No.
58376 (August 18, 2008), 73 FR 49726 (August 22, 2008) (SR-NYSEArca-
2008-70) (approving certain amendments to NYSE Arca Equities Rule
5.2(j)(6)(B)(I) and, as a result, renumbering NYSE Arca Equities
Rule 5.2(j)(6)(B)(I)(1)(b)(vi) to NYSE Arca Equities Rule
5.2(j)(6)(B)(I)(1)(b)(v), among other subsections).
    \7\ 17 CFR 240.10A-3.
    \8\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 52204
(August 3, 2005), 70 FR 46559 (August 10, 2005) (SR-PCX-2005-63);
56637 (October 10, 2007), 72 FR 58704 (October 16, 2007) (SR-
NYSEArca-2007-92); 56838 (November 26, 2007), 72 FR 67774 (November
30, 2007) (SR-NYSEArca-2007-118); 56879 (December 3, 2007), 72 FR
69271 (December 7, 2007) (SR-NYSEArca-2007-110); and 57132 (January
11, 2008), 73 FR 3300 (January 17, 2008) (SR-NYSEArca-2007-125).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange stated that, as of April 30, 2008, the market
capitalization of the ten largest Index Components accounting for the
top 20% of the Index weight was approximately $873.9 billion. The
highest weighted stock was Vodafone Group PLC, which accounted for 2%
of the Index weight and had a market capitalization of approximately
$209.6 billion.
    With respect to NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(6)(B)(I)(1)(b)(v),
which requires that at least 80% of the component stock trade on
markets that are members of ISG or parties to comprehensive
surveillance sharing agreements with the Exchange, the Exchange
represented that it has attempted, but was unable, to enter into
comprehensive surveillance sharing agreements with markets on which
approximately 36% of the Index Components trade. Specifically, the
Exchange does not have comprehensive surveillance sharing agreements
with Euronext Amsterdam (2%), Euronext Lisbon (2%), Euronext Paris
(6%), JSE Securities Exchange (Johannesburg) (6%), Borsa Italiana
(Milan) (4%), Prague Stock Exchange (2%), Bovespa (State of S[atilde]o
Paulo Stock Exchange)

(4%), Singapore Stock Exchange (2%), and Bolsa de Madrid (8%), and
these markets are not members of ISG.
    The Exchange stated that it might be unable to obtain surveillance
information from the above-noted exchanges regarding the relevant
component stocks, but that it intended to utilize its existing
surveillance procedures applicable to derivative products, including
Equity Index-Linked Securities, to monitor trading in the Notes. The
Exchange represented that such procedures are adequate to properly
monitor Exchange trading of the Notes in all trading sessions and to
deter and detect violations of Exchange rules. The Exchange's current
trading surveillance focuses on detecting securities trading outside
their normal patterns. When such situations are detected, surveillance
analysis follows and investigations are opened, where appropriate, to
review the behavior of all relevant parties for all relevant trading
violations. The Exchange further stated that it may obtain information
via ISG from other exchanges who are members of ISG.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ For a list of the current members and affiliate members of
ISG, see http://www.isgportal.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Notwithstanding the Notes' inability to meet the requirements of
NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(6)(B)(I)(1)(b)(v), the Exchange believes
that the underlying Index is sufficiently broad-based in scope and, as
such, is less susceptible to manipulation: The Index contains 50
companies, listed in 23 countries with no one exchange that is not
covered by a comprehensive surveillance sharing agreement listing
greater than 8% of such companies. The Exchange added that no one
security dominates the underlying Index, thereby serving to protect the
public interest and promote capital formation.

III. Discussion and Commission's Findings

    After careful review, the Commission finds that NYSE Arca's
proposal to list and trade the Notes is consistent with the Act and the
rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities
exchange.\10\ In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\11\ in that
it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster
cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating
transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(6) permits the Exchange to
consider Equity Index-Linked Securities for listing and trading
pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e) under the Act,\12\ the Notes do not meet all
of the generic listing requirements thereunder because the components
of the Index do not meet the requirements in NYSE Arca Equities Rule
5.2(j)(6)(B)(I)(1)(b)(v).\13\ NYSE Arca Equities Rule
5.2(j)(6)(B)(I)(1)(b)(v) provides that that all component securities of
the underlying index shall be either (A) securities (other than foreign
country securities and ADRs) that are (x) issued by an Act reporting
company or by an investment company registered under the Investment
Company Act of 1940, which, in each case, are listed on a national
securities exchange, and (y) an ``NMS stock'' (as defined in Rule 600
of Regulation NMS) or (B) foreign country securities or ADRs, provided
that foreign country securities or foreign country securities
underlying ADRs having their primary trading market outside the United
States on foreign trading markets that are not members of ISG or
parties to comprehensive surveillance sharing agreements with the
Exchange will not, in the aggregate, represent more than 20% of the
dollar weight of the index. According to the Exchange, in the case of
the Notes, approximately 36% of the dollar weight of the Index
represents Index Components trading on foreign trading markets that are
not members of ISG and with which the Exchange has not entered into any
comprehensive surveillance sharing agreements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(e).
    \13\ See supra note 6 and accompanying text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission notes that the Exchange represents that it has
attempted, but has not been able, to enter into comprehensive
surveillance sharing agreements with Euronext Amsterdam, Euronext
Lisbon, Euronext Paris, JSE Securities Exchange (Johannesburg), Borsa
Italiana (Milan), Prague Stock Exchange, Bovespa (State of S[atilde]o
Paulo Stock Exchange), Singapore Stock Exchange, and Bolsa de Madrid.
The Commission further notes that, in certain limited circumstances, it
has approved the listing and trading of derivative securities products
based on indices that were composed of stocks for which a national
securities exchange has not entered into a comprehensive surveillance
sharing agreement with the relevant foreign exchange.\14\ The Exchange
has represented that it intends to utilize its existing surveillance
procedures applicable to derivative products, including Equity Index-
Linked Securities, to monitor trading in the Notes and that such
procedures are adequate to properly monitor Exchange trading of the
Notes in all trading sessions and to deter and detect violations of
Exchange rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 58437
(August 28, 2008), 73 FR 51684 (September 4, 2008) (SR-NYSEArca-
2008-77) (approving the listing and trading of exchange-traded notes
linked to Barclays Middle East Equities (MSCI GCC)) and 54944
(December 15, 2006), 71 FR 77432 (December 26, 2006) (SR-NYSE-2006-
69) (approving the listing and trading of exchange-traded notes
linked to the MSCI India Equities Index).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the Exchange has represented that the Notes will
comply with all other requirements applicable to Equity Index-Linked
Securities including, but not limited to, requirements relating to the
dissemination of key information such as the Equity Reference Asset
value, rules and policies governing the trading of equity securities,
trading hours, trading halts, surveillance, firewalls, and Information
Bulletins to ETP Holders, as set forth in prior Commission orders
approving the generic listing rules applicable to the listing and
trading of Index-Linked Securities, generally, and Equity Index-Linked
Securities, in particular.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See supra note 8 and accompanying text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that the listing and trading of the Notes
is consistent with the Act. The Commission notes that, based on the
Exchange's representations, the Notes otherwise meet all of the other
applicable generic listing standards under NYSE Arca Equities Rule
5.2(j)(6). The Commission also notes that the Index is composed of
securities of 50 companies listed in 23 countries. The Commission
further notes that it has previously approved the listing and trading
of derivative securities products based on indices that were composed
of stocks that did not meet certain quantitative generic listing
criteria.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 57349
(February 19, 2008), 73 FR 10084 (February 25, 2008) (SR-NYSEArca-
2008-22) and 58437 (August 28, 2008), 73 FR 51684 (September 4,
2008) (SR-NYSEArca-2008-77). See also Securities Exchange Act
Release Nos. 55953 (June 25, 2007), 72 FR 36084 (July 2, 2007) (SR-
NYSE-2007-46) and 56695 (October 24, 2007), 72 FR 61413 (October 30,
2007) (SR-NYSEArca-2007-111).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the foregoing reasons, the Commission believes that the
proposal to list and trade the Notes is consistent with the Act and
finds good cause for approving the proposed rule change.

This order is based on the Exchange's representations.
    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\17\ that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSEArca-2008-79) be, and it
hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-21331 Filed 9-12-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P