The FAA invites you to send any written data, views, or arguments about this final rule. Send your comments to an address listed under ADDRESSES . Include “Docket No. FAA-2023-2229; Project Identifier MCAI-2023-00736-T” at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the final rule, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this final rule because of those comments.

Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR 11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact received about this final rule.

CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public disclosure. If your comments responsive to this AD contain commercial or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to this AD, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing CBI as “PROPIN.” The FAA will treat such marked submissions as confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public docket of this AD. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Gabriel Kim, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; phone: 516-228-7300; email: 9-avs-nyaco-cos@faa.gov. Any commentary that the FAA receives which is not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for this rulemaking.

Transport Canada, which is the aviation authority for Canada, has issued Transport Canada AD CF-2023-39, dated June 6, 2023 (Transport Canada AD CF-2023-39) (also referred to as the MCAI), to correct an unsafe condition for certain Airbus Canada Limited Partnership Model BD-500-1A10 and BD-500-1A11 airplanes. The MCAI states that an interference condition was found during airplane manufacturing between the pilot valve fittings and their mating holes in the rear spar of the CWB. The interference condition could damage the fitting and result in the fitting's failure under induced fatigue. Fitting failure could lead to a failure of its shroud attachment and subsequent fuel leak into the area behind the rear spar and into the landing gear bay. Such significant fuel leak, combined with a potential ignition source such as a failure of a bleed duct or a failure of wires/connectors in these areas, could create a fire hazard on the airplane.

You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2023-2229.

Transport Canada AD CF-2023-39 specifies procedures for replacing the pilot valve fittings with redesigned fittings. This material is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to the FAA's bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, it has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI referenced above. The FAA is issuing this AD after determining that the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design.

This AD requires accomplishing the actions specified in Transport Canada AD CF-2023-39 described previously, except for any differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this AD.

In the FAA's ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the AD process, the FAA developed a process to use some civil aviation authority (CAA) ADs as the primary source of information for compliance with requirements for corresponding FAA ADs. The FAA has been coordinating this process with manufacturers and CAAs. As a result, Transport Canada AD CF-2023-39 is incorporated by reference in this AD. This AD requires compliance with Transport Canada AD CF-2023-39 in its entirety through that incorporation, except for any differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this AD. Service information required by Transport Canada AD CF-2023-39 for compliance will be available at regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2023-2229 after this AD is published.

Section 553(b)(3)(B) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 551 et seq. ) authorizes agencies to dispense with notice and comment procedures for rules when the agency, for “good cause,” finds that those procedures are “impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” Under this section, an agency, upon finding good cause, may issue a final rule without providing notice and seeking comment prior to issuance. Further, section 553(d) of the APA authorizes agencies to make rules effective in less than thirty days, upon a finding of good cause.

There are currently no domestic operators of these products. Accordingly, notice and opportunity for prior public comment are unnecessary, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B). In addition, for the forgoing reason(s), the FAA finds that good cause exists pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d) for making this amendment effective in less than 30 days.

The requirements of the RFA do not apply when an agency finds good cause pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553 to adopt a rule without prior notice and comment. Because the FAA has determined that it has good cause to adopt this rule without notice and comment, RFA analysis is not required.

Currently, there are no affected U.S.-registered airplanes. If an affected airplane is imported and placed on the U.S. Register in the future, the FAA provides the following cost estimates to comply with this AD:

According to the manufacturer, some or all of the costs of this AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected individuals. The FAA does not control warranty coverage for affected individuals. As a result, the FAA has included all known costs in the cost estimate.

Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.

The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, section 44701: General requirements. Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:

(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866, and

(2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska.

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

The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all MHI RJ Aviation ULC Model CL-600-2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 & 440); CL-600-2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700, 701, & 702); CL-600-2C11 (Regional Jet Series 550); CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705); CL-600-2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900); and CL-600-2E25 (Regional Jet Series 1000) airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on July 19, 2023 (88 FR 46118). The NPRM was prompted by AD CF-2022-42, dated August 8, 2022, issued by Transport Canada, which is the aviation authority for Canada (referred to after this as the MCAI). The MCAI states that operators have reported frequent flight interruptions and high lavatory smoke detector removal rates due to the frequent testing of the smoke detector self-test switch by the flight crew using unsuitable objects. The MCAI also states there is a potential dormant failure of the lavatory smoke detector if the self-test switch check is not performed in accordance with revised procedures.

In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to require revising the existing maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate new or more restrictive AMM and CMR tasks. The FAA is issuing this AD to address a potential dormant failure of the lavatory smoke detector if the self-test switch check is not performed in accordance with revised AMM or CMR tasks. If these maintenance task changes are not implemented, and in combination with a fire in the lavatory, this may lead to a delay in the reaction time to address smoke/fire in the lavatory.

You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2023-1496.

The FAA received a comment from Air Line Pilots Association, International, who supported the NPRM without change.

The FAA received an additional comment from MHI RJ Aviation. The following presents the comment received on the NPRM and the FAA's response.

MHI RJ requested that the corrected revisions for Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM) Tasks 26-16-00-710-804-A01 and 26-16-00-710-803-A01 be identified as found in AMM CSP B-001, Revision 71. The commenter stated that the Maintenance Task Card Manual (MTCM) Task Card updates were also implemented in AMM Tasks 26-16-00-710-804-A01 and 26-16-00-710-803-A01, but references to the AMM tasks in the proposed AD do not indicate the corrected revision.

The FAA agrees with the requested change since it provides a means for operators to ensure the revised maintenance tasks are included in the AMM revision they are using. Therefore, figure 1 to paragraph (h) of this AD has been changed to specify AMM Rev 68 or later approved revisions.

This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to the FAA's bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, it has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI referenced above. The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered the comment received, and determined that air safety requires adopting this AD as proposed. Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on this product. Except for minor editorial changes, this AD is adopted as proposed in the NPRM. None of the changes will increase the economic burden on any operator.

The FAA reviewed Bombardier Temporary Revision 2A-75, dated May 28, 2020. This service information specifies new or more restrictive CMR tasks. 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.

The FAA estimates that this AD affects 1,024 airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

The FAA has determined that revising the maintenance or inspection program takes an average of 90 work-hours per operator, although the agency recognizes that this number may vary from operator to operator. Since operators incorporate maintenance or inspection program changes for their affected fleet(s), the FAA has determined that a per-operator estimate is more accurate than a per-airplane estimate. Therefore, the agency estimates the average total cost per operator to be $7,650 (90 work-hours × $85 per work-hour).

Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.

The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements. Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:

(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,

(2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and

(3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

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

The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2B16 (604 Variant) airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on July 25, 2023 (88 FR 47827). The NPRM was prompted by AD CF-2023-06, dated February 9, 2023 (referred to after this as the MCAI), issued by Transport Canada, which is the aviation authority for Canada. The MCAI states the sleeve loops on certain passenger oxygen mask lanyards were found to have improper crimping and unsealed ends.

In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to require an inspection of the passenger oxygen mask lanyards and replacement of defective oxygen mask lanyards. In the NPRM, the FAA also proposed to prohibit the installation of affected parts. The FAA is issuing this AD to address these defective oxygen mask lanyards, which could result in no oxygen flow to the mask during an emergency.

You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2023-1505.

The FAA received a comment from Bombardier. The following presents the comment received on the NPRM and the FAA's response to the comment.

Bombardier requested that the proposed AD be revised to remove reference to 601-3A and 601-3R Variants. The commenter stated that the proposed AD only applies to Model CL-600-2B16 (604 Variant) airplanes (Challenger 605 designation). Bombardier noted that the airplane serial numbers given in Bombardier Service Bulletin 605-35-008, dated October 28, 2022, and referenced in Transport Canada AD CF-2023-06, are all Model CL-600-2B16 (604 Variant) airplanes.

The FAA agrees for the reasons provided. The FAA revised the Summary, Background, and paragraph (c) of this AD accordingly.

This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to the FAA's bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, it has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI referenced above. The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received, and determined that air safety requires adopting this AD as proposed. Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on this product. Except for minor editorial changes, and any other changes described previously, this AD is adopted as proposed in the NPRM. None of the changes will increase the economic burden on any operator.

The FAA reviewed Bombardier Service Bulletin 605-35-008, dated October 28, 2022. This service information specifies procedures for a visual inspection of the existing passenger oxygen mask lanyards installed in the cabin or lavatory oxygen box assemblies, and replacement of the defective oxygen mask lanyards. The defective oxygen mask lanyards had improperly crimped sleeve loops and unsealed ends.

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.

The FAA estimates that this AD affects 120 airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary on-condition action that would be required based on the results of any required actions. The FAA has no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need this on-condition action:

The FAA has included all known costs in its cost estimate. According to the manufacturer, however, some or all costs of this AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected operators.

Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.

The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements. Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:

(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,

(2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and

(3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

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

The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Embraer S.A. Model EMB-135BJ airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on August 30, 2023 (88 FR 59813). The NPRM was prompted by AD 2023-03-01, effective March 6, 2023, issued by ANAC, which is the aviation authority for Brazil (ANAC AD 2023-03-01) (also referred to as the MCAI). The MCAI states that missing sealant was identified on the rivets installed in the interface between rib 3 and the wing skin in some Embraer Model EMB-135BJ airplanes. The lack of sealant when a failure on the rivet installation exists may result in a potential ignition source inside the fuel tank during a lightning strike, which, combined with flammable fuel vapors, could result in a fuel tank explosion and consequent loss of the airplane.

In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to require applying sealant on the rivets installed in the interface between rib 3 and wing skin, as specified in ANAC AD 2023-03-01. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2023-1807.

The FAA received no comments on the NPRM or on the determination of the cost to the public.

This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to the FAA's bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, it has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI referenced above. The FAA reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety requires adopting this AD as proposed. Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on this product. Except for minor editorial changes, this AD is adopted as proposed in the NPRM. None of the changes will increase the economic burden on any operator.

ANAC AD 2023-03-01 specifies procedures for applying sealant on the rivets installed in the interface between rib 3 and wing skin.

This material is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

The FAA estimates that this AD affects 10 airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

The FAA has included all known costs in its cost estimate. According to the manufacturer, however, some or all of the costs of this AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected operators.

Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.

The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements. Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:

(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,

(2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and

(3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

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

The FAA published a final rule in the Federal Register (88 FR 82252; November 24, 2023), amending and establishing multiple RNAV T-routes in support of the FAA's VOR MON Program. Subsequent to publication, the FAA determined that for RNAV route T-358, the SWANN, MD; AVALO, NJ; MANTA, NJ; BURDY, MA; LBSTA, MA; and MESHL, ME, route points were inadvertently identified as WPs, in error. This rule corrects those errors by changing all references to these six points as Fixes. These are editorial changes only to match the FAA's aeronautical database information.

Additionally, the FAA determined that it inadvertently omitted the BEADS, NY, Fix, and the JORDN, NY, Fix, from the part 71 description of RNAV route T-358. The BEADS Fix and the JORDN Fix were part of RNAV route T-358 but were incorrectly calculated to be a turn of less than one degree so they were not originally included in the part 71 description. Subsequent to publication, the FAA determined that the route segment between the MANTA, NJ, Fix and the BEADS Fix was a turn of two degrees; and the route segment between the ORCHA, NY, WP and the JORDN Fix was a turn of one degree, which require that the BEADS and the JORDN Fixes be added to the part 71 description. Adding the BEADS Fix and the JORDN Fix to RNAV route T-358 does not substantially alter the route.

In describing the changes to RNAV route T-445, the location of the Westminster, VORTAC was identified in error as “ME” and is corrected from “Westminster, ME (EMI), VORTAC” to “Westminster, MD, (EMI), VORTAC”.

Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, in Docket No. FAA-2023-1329. As published in the Federal Register of November 24, 2023 (88 FR 82252), FR Doc. 2023-25852, is corrected as follows:

1. On page 82253, in the first column, under the heading “The Rule” in the paragraph starting with “T-358”, correct “AVALO, NJ, WP” to read “AVALO, NJ, Fix”.

2. On page 82253, in the first column, under the heading “The Rule” in the paragraph starting with “T-358”, correct “AVALO WP and the BURDY, MA, WP; and between the LBSTA, MA, WP” to read “AVALO Fix and the BURDY, MA, Fix; and between the LBSTA, MA, Fix”.

3. On page 82253, in the first column, under the heading “The Rule” in the paragraph starting with “T-445,” correct “Westminster, ME (EMI), VORTAC” to read “Westminster, MD (EMI), VORTAC”.

4. On page 82253 correct the table “T-358 Martinsburg, WV (MRB) to Augusta, ME (AUG) [Amended]” to read:

The FAA published a final rule in the Federal Register (88 FR 82257; November 24, 2023), renaming restricted areas R-2103A and R-2103B, Fort Rucker, AL, and updating the using agency description to reflect the change. Subsequent to publication, the FAA identified that the final rule was published with the incorrect docket number. This action corrects this error by replacing the incorrect docket number, FAA-2023-0242, with the correct one, FAA-2023-2042.

Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Renaming of Restricted Areas R-2103A and R-2103B; Fort Rucker, AL, published in the Federal Register on November 24, 2023 (88 FR 82257), FR Doc. 2023-25850, on page 82257, in the third column, is corrected by removing, “Docket No. FAA-2023-0242” and adding in its place, “Docket No. FAA-2023-2042”.

The FAA published a final rule in the Federal Register (88 FR 83023; November 28, 2023), renaming restricted areas R-5311A, R-5311B, and R-5311C, Fort Bragg, NC, and updating the using agency description to reflect the change. Additionally, geographic coordinate technical amendments for two boundary points listed in the restricted areas were made to accurately align the existing boundary with the Little River referenced in the descriptions. Subsequent to publication, the FAA identified that the final rule was published with the incorrect docket number. This action corrects this error by replacing the incorrect docket number, FAA-2023-0243, with the correct one, FAA-2023-2043.

Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Renaming of Restricted Areas R-5311A, R-5311B, and R-5311C; Fort Bragg, NC, published in the Federal Register on November 28, 2023 (88 FR 83023), FR Doc. 2023-26003, on page 83023, in the second column, is corrected by removing “Docket No. FAA-2023-0243” and adding in its place, “Docket No. FAA-2023-2043”.

PBGC's regulation on Allocation of Assets in Single-Employer Plans (29 CFR part 4044) prescribes actuarial assumptions—including interest assumptions—for valuing benefits under terminating single-employer plans covered by title IV of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA). The interest assumptions in the regulation are also published on PBGC's website ( https://www.pbgc.gov ).

PBGC uses the interest assumptions in appendix B to part 4044 (“Interest Rates Used to Value Benefits”) to determine the present value of annuities in an involuntary or distress termination of a single-employer plan under the asset allocation regulation. The assumptions are also used to determine the value of multiemployer plan benefits and certain assets when a plan terminates by mass withdrawal in accordance with PBGC's regulation on Duties of Plan Sponsor Following Mass Withdrawal (29 CFR part 4281).

The first quarter 2024 interest assumptions will be 5.45 percent for the first 20 years following the valuation date and 5.22 percent thereafter. In comparison with the interest assumptions in effect for the fourth quarter of 2023, these interest assumptions represent no change in the select period (the period during which the select rate (the initial rate) applies), an increase of 0.39 percent in the select rate, and an increase of 0.85 percent in the ultimate rate (the final rate).

PBGC has determined that notice of, and public comment on, this rule are impracticable, unnecessary, and contrary to the public interest. PBGC routinely updates the interest assumptions in appendix B of the asset allocation regulation each quarter so that they are available to value benefits. Accordingly, PBGC finds that the public interest is best served by issuing this rule expeditiously, without an opportunity for notice and comment, and that good cause exists for making the assumptions set forth in this amendment effective less than 30 days after publication to allow the use of the proper assumptions to estimate the value of plan benefits for plans with valuation dates early in the first quarter of 2024.

PBGC has determined that this action is not a “significant regulatory action” under the criteria set forth in Executive Order 12866.

Because no general notice of proposed rulemaking is required for this amendment, the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 does not apply. See 5 U.S.C. 601(2).

In consideration of the foregoing, 29 CFR part 4044 is amended as follows:

The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are “impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with respect to this rule because a temporary safety zone must be established immediately to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment from potential hazards created by the bridge arch installation. It is impracticable to publish an NPRM because we must establish this safety zone by December 18, 2023.

Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register . Delaying the effective date of this rule would be impracticable because action is needed to respond to the potential safety hazards associated with the installation of the arch on the McClugage bridge beginning December 18, 2023.

The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034. The COTP of Sector Upper Mississippi River has determined that potential hazards associated with the installation of the arch on the McClugage Bridge will be a safety concern for anyone operating or transiting within the Illinois River from MM 165.2 through 166.3. This rule is needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in the navigable waters within the safety zone during the installation of the arch.

The installation of the arch will be occurring on the McClugage Bridge located on MM 165.7 and scheduled for 48 hours beginning December 19 through December 21, 2023. The installation has an operational window from December 18 through December 25, 2023 in the event of inclement weather delaying the installation. The safety zone is designed to protect waterway users until work is complete.

No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the safety zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated representative. A designated representative is a commissioned, warrant, or petty officer of the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) assigned to units under the operational control of USCG Sector Upper Mississippi River. To seek permission to enter, contact the COTP or a designated representative via VHF-FM channel 16, or through USCG Sector Upper Mississippi River at 314-269-2332. Persons and vessels permitted to enter the safety zone must comply with all lawful orders or directions issued by the COTP or designated representative. The COTP or a designated representative will inform the public of the effective period for the safety zone as well as any changes in the dates and times of enforcement, as well as reductions in the size of the safety zone through Local Notice to Mariners (LNMs), Broadcast Notices to Mariners (BNMs), or Safety Marine Information Broadcast (SMIB), as appropriate.

We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits. This rule has not been designated a “significant regulatory action,” under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, as amended by Executive Order 14094 (Modernizing Regulatory Review). Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location, and duration of the safety zone. The safety zone would impact a small designated area located on the Illinois River at MM 165.2 through 166.3, near Peoria, IL. The safety zone is expected to be active only during the installation of the arch for the McClugage Bridge, scheduled for a 48 hour period between December 19 and 21, 2023, or until December 25, 2023. Vessel traffic will be able to safely transit through this safety zone when the safety zone is not enforced.

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator because the zone will be enforced only when work is being conducted.

Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

This rule will not call for a new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has 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. We have analyzed this rule under that order and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order 13132.

Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves a safety zone encompassing the width of the Illinois River at MM 165.2 through 166.3. It is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 1. A Record of Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket. For instructions on locating the docket, see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble.

The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. Protesters are asked to call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or security of people, places, or vessels.

For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 165 as follows:

The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are “impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with respect to this rule because it is impracticable. The Coast Guard received all amplifying information for this event regarding the need for a safety zone on December 4, 2023. The Coast Guard must establish this safety zone by December 31, 2023, and lacks the time for a reasonable comment period and to consider those comments before issuing the rule.

Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register . Delaying the effective date of this rule would be contrary to the public interest because action is needed on December 31, 2023, to ensure the safety of personnel, vessels, and the marine environment from potential hazards created by the fireworks show.

The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034. The Captain of the Port Houston-Galveston (COTP) has determined that potential hazards associated with the fireworks show on December 31, 2023, in Kemah, TX, will be a safety concern for anyone within an 840-foot radius of a fireworks display barge, located in Galveston Bay, TX at 29°32′52.72″ N, 95°00′54.38″ W, on the south side of the channel. The purpose of this rulemaking is to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in the navigable waters within the safety zone before, during, and after the scheduled fireworks display.

The fireworks will take place from approximately 9 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. on December 31, 2023. The safety zone will cover all navigable waters within an 840-foot radius of a fireworks display barge, located in Galveston Bay, TX, at 29°32′52.72″ N, 95°00′54.38″ W, on the south side of the channel. The duration of the zone is intended to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in these navigable waters before, during, and after the fireworks display. No vessel or person is permitted to enter the safety zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated representative. Persons or vessels seeking to enter the safety zone must request permission from the COTP on VHF-FM channel 16 or by telephone at 866-539-8114. If permission is granted, all persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of the COTP or designated representative. The COTP or a designated representative will inform the public of the enforcement times and date for this safety zone through Broadcast Notices to Mariners, Local Notices to Mariners, and/or Safety Marine Information Broadcasts as appropriate.

We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits. This rule has not been designated a “significant regulatory action,” under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, as amended by Executive Order 14094 (Modernizing Regulatory Review). Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

This regulatory action determination is based on the size, duration, and location of the safety zone. The safety zone will last for the limited duration of three hours. It covers an 840-foot radius of navigable waters of Galveston Bay, TX. The zone does not completely restrict vessel traffic and allows mariners to ask for permission to enter the zone.

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.

Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

This rule will not call for a new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has 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. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order 13132.

Also, this rule does not have Tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian Tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes.

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or Tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves a temporary safety zone lasting only three hours that will prohibit entry within 840 feet of the fireworks display barge. It is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 1. A Record of Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket. For instructions on locating the docket, see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble.

The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. Protesters are asked to call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or security of people, places or vessels.

For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 165 as follows:

On October 6, 2023, the Postal Service filed a notice with the PRC In Docket No. R2024-1 of mailing services price adjustments to be effective on January 21, 2024. On October 24, 2023, the Postal Service published notification of proposed price changes in the Federal Register entitled “International Mailing Services: Proposed Price Changes” (88 FR 72972). The notification included price changes that the Postal Service would adopt for certain services covered by Mailing Standards of the United States Postal Service, International Mail Manual (IMM®) and publish in Notice 123, Price List, on Postal Explorer® at pe.usps.com. The Postal Service received no comments.

In PRC Order No. 6814, issued on November 22, 2023, in PRC Docket No. R2024-1, the PRC concluded that prices in the Postal Service's notice in Docket No. R2024-1 may go into effect on January 21, 2024. The new prices will accordingly be posted in Notice 123, Price List, on Postal Explorer at pe.usps.com.

The price for a single-piece postcard will be $1.55 worldwide. The First-Class Mail International (FCMI) letter nonmachinable will be $0.44. The FCMI single-piece letter and flat prices will be as follows:

The Postal Service will increase prices for certain market dominant international extra services as noted:

• Certificate of Mailing service: Fees for certificate of mailing service for FCMI will increase as follows:

• Registered Mail® service: The fee for international Registered Mail service for FCMI will increase to $20.75.

• Return Receipt service: The fee for international return receipt service for FCMI will increase to $5.80.

• Customs Clearance and Delivery Fee: The Customs Clearance and Delivery Fee per dutiable item for Inbound Letter Post letters and flats will increase to $8.45.

• International Business Reply TM Mail Service: The price for IBRS cards will increase to $2.15, and the price for IBRS envelopes (up to 2 ounces) will increase to $2.70.

New prices will be listed in the updated Notice 123, Price List.

TSCA section 5(a)(2) (15 U.S.C. 2604(a)(2)) authorizes EPA to determine that a use of a chemical substance is a “significant new use.” EPA must make this determination by rule after considering all relevant factors, including the four TSCA section 5(a)(2) factors listed in Unit II.A.1.

EPA is finalizing these SNURs under TSCA section 5(a)(2) for certain chemical substances that were the subject of PMNs. This document addresses final rules for PMN substances that are subject to orders issued under TSCA section 5(e)(1)(A), as required by the determinations made under TSCA section 5(a)(3)(B). Those TSCA Orders require protective measures to limit exposures or otherwise mitigate the potential unreasonable risk. The final SNURs identify as significant new uses any manufacturing, processing, use, distribution in commerce, or disposal that does not conform to the restrictions imposed by the underlying TSCA Orders, consistent with TSCA section 5(f)(4).

Previously, EPA proposed SNURs for these chemical substances in the Federal Register of October 31, 2022 (87 FR 65548) (FRL-10183-02-OCSPP). The docket includes information considered by the Agency in developing the proposed and final rules, including public comments and EPA's responses to the public comments received. The proposed SNURs for certain chemical substances not included in this Federal Register document will be addressed in a future Federal Register document.

The Agency is issuing these SNURs to ensure that EPA receives timely advanced notice of any future manufacturing (including importing) or processing of the chemical substances subject to these proposed SNURs for uses identified as significant new uses, and to ensure that an appropriate determination (relevant to the potential risks associated with such manufacturing (including importing), processing, distribution in commerce, use and disposal) has been issued prior to the commencement of such manufacturing (including importing) or processing. The SNURs are necessary to ensure that manufacturing (including import) or processing for significant new uses cannot proceed until EPA has responded to the planned new use circumstances by taking the required actions under TSCA sections 5(e) or 5(f) in the event that EPA determines that:

(1) The significant new use presents an unreasonable risk under the conditions of use (without consideration of costs or other non-risk factors, and including an unreasonable risk to a potentially exposed or susceptible subpopulation (PESS) identified as relevant by EPA);

(2) The information available to EPA is insufficient to permit a reasoned evaluation of the health and environmental effects of the significant new use;

(3) In the absence of sufficient information, the manufacturing (including importing), processing, distribution in commerce, use, or disposal of the substance, or any combination of such activities, may present an unreasonable risk (without consideration of costs or other non-risk factors, and including an unreasonable risk to a PESS identified as relevant by EPA); or

(4) There is substantial production and sufficient potential for environmental release or human exposure (as defined in TSCA section 5(a)(3)(B)(ii)(II)).

For manufacturing (including importing) or processing for the significant new use to proceed after EPA has made one of these four determinations, EPA must take actions under TSCA sections 5(e) or 5(f) to protect health and the environment. However, EPA may also determine that the significant new use is not likely to present an unreasonable risk under TSCA section 5(a)(3)(C), after which manufacturing (including importing) or processing for the significant new use may proceed.

The rationale and objectives for this SNUR are further explained in Unit II.B.

This action may apply to you if you manufacture (defined by statute to include import), process, or use the chemical substances addressed in this Federal Register document. 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:

• Manufacturers or processors of one or more subject chemical substances (NAICS codes 325 and 324110), e.g., chemical manufacturing and petroleum refineries.

This action may also affect certain entities through pre-existing import certification and export notification rules under TSCA. Chemical importers are subject to the TSCA section 13 (15 U.S.C. 2612), import provisions promulgated at 19 CFR 12.118 through 12.127 (see also 19 CFR 127.28), and the EPA policy in support of import certification at 40 CFR part 707, subpart B. Chemical importers must certify that the shipment of the chemical substance complies with all applicable rules and Orders under TSCA, including regulations issued under TSCA sections 5, 6, 7 and Title IV.

In addition, pursuant to 40 CFR 721.20, this action may also apply to any persons who export or intend to export a chemical substance identified in this document is subject to the export notification provisions of TSCA section 12(b) (15 U.S.C. 2611(b)) (see 40 CFR 721.20), and must comply with the export notification requirements in 40 CFR part 707, subpart D.

EPA has evaluated the potential costs of establishing SNUR reporting requirements for potential manufacturers (including importers) and processors of the chemical substances included in these SNURs. This analysis, which is available in the docket, is briefly summarized here.

If a SNUN is submitted, costs are an estimated $26,700 per SNUN submission for large business submitters and $11,000 for small business submitters. These estimates include the cost to prepare and submit the SNUN (including registration for EPA's Central Data Exchange (CDX)), and the payment of a user fee. Businesses that submit a SNUN would be subject to either a $19,020 user fee required by 40 CFR 700.45(c)(2)(ii) and (d), or, if they are a small business as defined at 13 CFR 121.201, a reduced user fee of $3,300 (40 CFR 700.45(c)(1)(ii) and (d)) per fiscal year 2022. The costs of submission for SNUNs will not be incurred by any company unless a company decides to pursue a significant new use as defined in these SNURs. Additionally, these estimates reflect the costs and fees as they are known at the time of this rulemaking.

EPA has also evaluated the potential costs associated with the export notification requirements under TSCA section 12(b) and the implementing regulations at 40 CFR part 707, subpart D. For persons exporting a substance that is the subject of a SNUR, a one-time notice to EPA must be provided for the first export or intended export to a particular country. The total costs of export notification will vary by chemical, depending on the number of required notifications ( i.e., the number of countries to which the chemical is exported). While EPA is unable to make any estimate of the likely number of export notifications for the chemical substances covered by these SNURs, as stated in the accompanying economic analysis, the estimated cost of the export notification requirement on a per unit basis is approximately $106.

TSCA section 5(a)(2) states that EPA's determination that a use of a chemical substance is a significant new use must be made after consideration of all relevant factors, including:

• The projected volume of manufacturing and processing of a chemical substance.

• The extent to which a use changes the type or form of exposure of human beings or the environment to a chemical substance.

• The extent to which a use increases the magnitude and duration of exposure of human beings or the environment to a chemical substance.

• The reasonably anticipated manner and methods of manufacturing, processing, distribution in commerce, and disposal of a chemical substance.

In addition to the factors enumerated in TSCA section 5(a)(2), the statute authorizes EPA to consider any other relevant factors.

EPA has used reasonably available information, as well as technical procedures, measures, methods, protocols, methodologies, and models consistent with the best available science, as applicable. These information sources supply information relevant to whether a particular use would be a significant new use, based on relevant factors including those listed under TSCA section 5(a)(2).

The clarity and completeness of the data, assumptions, methods, quality assurance, and analyses employed in EPA's decision are documented, as applicable and to the extent necessary for purposes of the proposed SNURs, in the references cited throughout the preamble of this proposed rule. The extent to which the various information, procedures, measures, methods, protocols, methodologies or models used in EPA's decision have been subject to independent verification or peer review is adequate to justify their use, collectively, in the record for a significant new use rule.

In determining what would constitute a significant new use for the chemical substances that are the subject of these SNURs, EPA considered relevant information about the toxicity of the chemical substances and potential human exposures and environmental releases that may be associated with possible uses of these chemical substances, in the context of the four TSCA section 5(a)(2) factors listed in Unit II.A.1.

These SNURs include PMN substances that are subject to Orders issued under TSCA section 5(e)(1)(A), as required by the determinations made under TSCA section 5(a)(3)(B). The TSCA Orders require protective measures to limit exposures or otherwise mitigate the potential unreasonable risk. The SNURs identify significant new uses as any manufacturing, processing, use, distribution in commerce, or disposal that does not conform to the restrictions imposed by the underlying TSCA Orders, consistent with TSCA section 5(f)(4).

During review of the PMNs submitted for the chemical substances that are subject to these SNURs, EPA concluded that regulation was warranted under TSCA section 5(e), pending the development of information sufficient to make reasoned evaluations of the health or environmental effects of the chemical substances. The basis for such findings is outlined in Unit V. of the proposed rule for each chemical. Based on these findings, TSCA section 5(e) Orders requiring the use of appropriate exposure controls were negotiated with the PMN submitters. As a general matter, EPA believes it is necessary to follow the TSCA Orders with a SNUR that identifies the absence of those protective measures as significant new uses to ensure that all manufacturers and processors—not just the original submitter—are held to the same standard.

EPA is issuing these SNURs because the Agency wants to

• Receive notice of any person's intent to manufacture or process a listed chemical substance for the described significant new use before that activity begins.

• Have an opportunity to review and evaluate data submitted in a SNUN before the notice submitter begins manufacturing or processing a listed chemical substance for the described significant new use; and

• To make a determination under TSCA section 5(a)(3) regarding the use described in the SNUN, under the conditions of use. The Agency will either determine under TSCA section 5(a)(3)(C) that significant new use is not likely to present an unreasonable risk, including an unreasonable risk to a potentially exposed or susceptible subpopulation identified as relevant by the Administrator under the conditions of use, or make a determination under TSCA section 5(a)(3)(A) or (B) and take the required regulatory action associated with the determination, before manufacture or processing for the significant new use of the chemical substance can occur.

General provisions for SNURs appear in 40 CFR part 721, subpart A. These provisions describe persons required to submit a Significant New Use Notice (SNUN), recordkeeping requirements, and exemptions to reporting requirements, among other things.

Provisions relating to user fees appear at 40 CFR part 700. Pursuant to 40 CFR 721.1(c), persons submitting a SNUN are subject to the same requirements and regulatory procedures as submitters of PMNs under TSCA section 5(a)(1)(A). These include the information submission requirements of TSCA sections 5(b) and 5(d)(1), the exemptions authorized by TSCA sections 5(h)(1), (h)(2), (h)(3), and (h)(5), and the regulations at 40 CFR part 720, except where modified in part 721.

Once EPA receives a SNUN, and before the manufacture or processing for the significant new use can commence, EPA must either determine that the use addressed in the SNUN is not likely to present an unreasonable risk of injury under the conditions of use for the chemical substance or take such regulatory action as is associated with an alternative determination. If EPA determines that the use is not likely to present an unreasonable risk, EPA is required under TSCA section 5(g) to make public, and submit for publication in the Federal Register , a statement of EPA's findings.

Any use that EPA determines in the final rule was ongoing as of the date of publication of the proposal and did not cease prior to issuance of the final rule, will not be designated as a significant new use in the final rule. EPA has no information to suggest that any of the significant new uses identified in this rule are ongoing.

Under the procedures in 40 CFR 721.11 a manufacturer or processor may request EPA to determine whether a specific use would be a significant new use under the rule. The manufacturer or processor must show that it has a bona fide intent to manufacture or process the chemical substance and must identify the specific use for which it intends to manufacture or process the chemical substance. If EPA concludes that the person has shown a bona fide intent to manufacture or process the chemical substance, EPA will identify any confidential significant new use designations under the rule. Since most of the chemical identities of the chemical substances subject to these SNURs are also CBI, manufacturers and processors can combine the bona fide submission under the procedure in 40 CFR 721.11 into a single step to identify if a chemical substance is subject to 40 CFR part 721 and if a specific use would be a significant new use under the rule.

The chemical substances subject to this rule have undergone premanufacture review. In cases where EPA has not received a notice of commencement (NOC) and the chemical substance is not on the TSCA Inventory, no person may commence any activities without first submitting a PMN. Therefore, when EPA has received a PMN for a chemical substance but has not received a NOC for that same substance, the fact that a NOC has not been received is evidence that no manufacturing or processing of the chemical substance is occuring in the United States. When chemical substances identified in this rule are added to the TSCA Inventory, EPA recognizes that, before the rule is effective, other persons might engage in a use that has been identified as a significant new use. However, TSCA Orders have been issued for these chemical substances, and the PMN submitters are prohibited by the TSCA Orders from undertaking activities which would be designated as significant new uses. The identities of many of the chemical substances subject to these SNURs have been claimed as confidential per 40 CFR 720.85.

As discussed in the Federal Register of April 24, 1990 (55 FR 17376 (FRL-3658-5)), EPA has decided that the intent of TSCA section 5(a)(1)(B) is best served by designating a use as a significant new use as of the date of publication of the proposed rule rather than as of the effective date of the final rule. The objective of EPA's approach is to ensure that a person cannot impede finalization of a SNUR by initiating a significant new use after publication of the proposed rule but before the effective date of the final rule. Uses arising after the publication of the proposed rule are distinguished from uses that are identified in the final rule as having been ongoing on the date of publication of the proposed rule. The former would be new uses, the latter ongoing uses, except that uses that are identified as ongoing as of the publication of the proposed rule would not be considered ongoing uses if they have ceased by the date of issuance of a final rule.

In the unlikely event that before a final rule becomes effective a person begins commercial manufacturing (including importing) or processing of the chemical substances for a use that is designated as a significant new use in that final rule, such a person would have to cease any such activity upon the effective date of the final rule. To resume their activities, these persons would have to first comply with all applicable SNUR notification requirements and wait until all TSCA prerequisites for the commencement of manufacture or processing have been satisfied.

Issuance of a SNUR for a chemical substance does not signify that the chemical substance is listed on the TSCA Chemical Substance Inventory (TSCA Inventory). Guidance on how to determine if a chemical substance is on the TSCA Inventory is available on the internet at https://www.epa.gov/tsca-inventory.

According to 40 CFR 721.1(c), persons submitting a SNUN must comply with the same notification requirements and EPA regulatory procedures as persons submitting a PMN, including submission of test data on health and environmental effects as described in 40 CFR 720.50. SNUNs must be submitted on EPA Form No. 7710-25, generated using e-PMN software, and submitted to the Agency in accordance with the procedures set forth in 40 CFR 720.40. E-PMN software is available electronically at https://www.epa.gov/reviewing-new-chemicals-under-toxic-substances-control-act-tsca.

EPA recognizes that TSCA section 5 does not require developing any particular new information ( e.g., generating test data) before submission of a SNUN. There is an exception: If a person is otherwise required to submit information for a chemical substance subject to the SNUR pursuant to a rule, TSCA Order or consent agreement under TSCA section 4, then TSCA section 5(b)(1)(A) requires such information to be submitted to EPA at the time of submission of the SNUN.

In the absence of a rule, Order, or consent agreement under TSCA section 4 covering the chemical substance, persons are required only to submit information in their possession or control and to describe any other information known or reasonably ascertainable (see 40 CFR 720.50). However, upon review of PMNs and SNUNs, the Agency may determine under TSCA section 5(e) that it is necessary to require appropriate testing. Unit IV. of the proposed rule lists potentially useful information for the SNURs listed in this document. Descriptions of this information is provided for informational purposes. The potentially useful information identified in Unit IV. of the proposed rule will be useful to EPA's evaluation in the event that someone submits a SNUN for the significant new use.

EPA strongly encourages persons to consult with the Agency before performing any testing. Furthermore, pursuant to TSCA section 4(h), which pertains to reduction of testing in vertebrate animals, EPA encourages dialog with the Agency on the use of alternative test methods and strategies (also called New Approach Methodologies, or NAMs), if available, to generate the recommended test data. EPA encourages dialog with Agency representatives to help determine how best the submitter can meet both the data needs and the objective of TSCA section 4(h). For more information on alternative test methods and strategies to reduce vertebrate animal testing, visit https://www.epa.gov/assessing-and-managing-chemicals-under-tsca/alternative-test-methods-and-strategies-reduce.

The potentially useful information listed in Unit IV. of the proposed rule may not be the only means of addressing the potential risks of the chemical substance. However, submitting a SNUN without any test data or other information may increase the likelihood that EPA will take action under TSCA sections 5(e) or 5(f). EPA recommends that potential SNUN submitters contact EPA early enough so that they will be able to conduct the appropriate tests.

SNUN submitters should be aware that EPA will be better able to evaluate SNUNs which provide detailed information on the following:

• Human exposure and environmental release that may result from the significant new use of the chemical substances.

• Information on risks posed by the chemical substances compared to risks posed by potential substitutes.

EPA received public comments on the proposed rules from seven identifying entities. The Agency's responses are presented in the Response to Public Comments document that is available in the docket for this rulemaking. EPA is not finalizing the SNUR applicable to PMN P-20-0105, which was proposed as 40 CFR 721.11764. As described in the response to comments EPA will re-propose and finalize that SNUR in a future action.

EPA is establishing significant new use and recordkeeping requirements for certain chemical substances in 40 CFR part 721, subpart E. In Unit V. of the proposed SNURs, EPA provided the following information for each chemical substance:

• PMN number.

• Chemical name (generic name, if the specific name is claimed as confidential business information (CBI)).

• Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number (CAS RN) (if assigned for non-confidential chemical identities).

• Effective date of and basis for the TSCA Order.

• Potentially Useful Information. This is information identified by EPA that would help characterize the potential health and/or environmental effects of the chemical substances if a manufacturer or processor is considering submitting a SNUN for a significant new use designated by the SNUR.

• CFR citation assigned in the regulatory text section of these rules. The regulatory text specifies the activities designated as significant new uses. Certain new uses, including production volume limits and other uses designated in the rules, may be claimed as CBI. In cases where the rules establish certain significant new uses which have been claimed as CBI subject to Agency confidentiality regulations at 40 CFR part 2 and 40 CFR part 720, subpart E, absent a final determination or other disposition of the confidentiality claim under 40 CFR part 2 procedures, EPA is required to keep this information confidential.

Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders can be found at https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations-and-executive-orders.

This action establishes SNURs for new chemical substances that were the subject of PMNs. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from review under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), as amended by Executive Order 14094 (88 FR 21879, April 11, 2023).

According to the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. ), an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information that requires OMB approval under PRA, unless it has been approved by OMB and 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 , are listed in 40 CFR part 9, and included on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable.

The information collection requirements associated with SNURs have already been approved by OMB pursuant to the PRA under OMB control number 2070-0038 (EPA ICR No. 1188.13). This action does not impose any burden requiring additional OMB approval. If an entity were to submit a SNUN to the Agency, the annual burden is estimated to average between 30 and 170 hours per response. This burden estimate includes the time needed to review instructions, search existing data sources, gather and maintain the data needed, and complete, review, and submit the required SNUN.

EPA is amending the table in 40 CFR part 9 to list the SNURs and OMB approval number for the information collection activities contained in this action. This listing of the OMB control numbers and their subsequent codification in the CFR satisfies the display requirements of PRA and OMB's implementing regulations at 5 CFR part 1320. The Information Collection Request (ICR) covering the SNUR activities was previously subject to public notice and comment prior to OMB approval, and given the technical nature of the table, EPA finds that further notice and comment to amend it is unnecessary. As a result, EPA finds that there is “good cause” under section 553(b)(3)(B) of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B)) to amend this table without further notice and comment.

EPA always welcomes your feedback on the burden estimate. Send any comments about the accuracy of the burden estimate, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including through the use of automated collection techniques, to the Director, Regulatory Support Division, Office of Mission Support (2822T), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001. Please remember to include the OMB control number in any correspondence, but do not submit any completed forms to this address.

I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. ). The requirement to submit a SNUN applies to any person (including small or large entities) who intends to engage in any activity described in the final rule as a “significant new use.” Because these uses are “new,” based on all information currently available to EPA, EPA has concluded that no small or large entities presently engage in such activities. A SNUR requires that any person who intends to engage in such activity in the future must first notify EPA by submitting a SNUN. Although some small entities may decide to pursue a significant new use in the future, EPA cannot presently determine how many, if any, there may be. However, EPA's experience to date is that, in response to the promulgation of SNURs covering over 1,000 chemicals, the Agency receives only a small number of SNUNs per year. For example, the number of SNUNs received was 10 in Federal fiscal year (FY) FY2016, 14 in FY2017, 16 in FY2018, five in FY2019, seven in FY2020, and 13 in FY2021, and only a fraction of these were from small businesses.

In addition, the Agency currently offers relief to qualifying small businesses by reducing the SNUN submission fee from $19,020 to $3,330. This lower fee reduces the total reporting and recordkeeping cost of submitting a SNUN to about $11,164 per SNUN submission for qualifying small firms. Therefore, the potential economic impacts of complying with this SNUR are not expected to be significant or adversely impact a substantial number of small entities. In a SNUR that published in the Federal Register of June 2, 1997 (62 FR 29684) (FRL-5597-1), the Agency presented its general determination that SNURs are not expected to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, which was provided to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.

Based on EPA's experience with proposing and finalizing SNURs, State, local, and Tribal governments have not been impacted by these rulemakings, and EPA does not have any reasons to believe that any State, local, or Tribal government will be impacted by this action. As such, EPA has determined that this action does not impose any enforceable duty, contain any unfunded mandate, or otherwise have any effect on small governments subject to the requirements of UMRA sections 202, 203, 204, or 205 (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq. ).

This action will not have federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because it is not expected to have a substantial direct effect on States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Accordingly, the requirements of Executive Order 13132 do not apply to this action.

This action does not have Tribal implications as specified in Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because it is not expected to have substantial direct effects on Indian Tribes, significantly or uniquely affect the communities of Indian Tribal governments, and does not involve or impose any requirements that affect Indian Tribes. Accordingly, the requirements of Executive Order 13175 do not apply to this action.

This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it does not concern an environmental health or safety risk. Since this action does not concern human health, EPA's 2021 Policy on Children's Health also does not apply. Although the establishment of these SNURs do not address an existing children's environmental health concern because the chemical uses involved are not ongoing uses, SNURs require that persons notify EPA at least 90 days before commencing manufacture (defined by statute to include import) or processing of any of these chemical substances for an activity that is designated as a significant new use by this rule. This notification allows EPA to assess the intended uses to identify potential risks and take appropriate actions before the activities commence.

This action is not a “significant energy action” as defined in Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), because it is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy.

This action does not involve any technical standards subject to NTTAA section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).

This action does not concern human health or environmental conditions and therefore cannot be evaluated with respect to the potential for disproportionate impacts on non-white and low-income populations in accordance with Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) and Executive Order 14096 (88 FR 25251, April 26, 2023). Although this action does not concern human health or environmental conditions, the premanufacture notifications required by these SNURs allows EPA to assess the intended uses to identify potential disproportionate risks and take appropriate actions before the activities commence.

This action is subject to the CRA (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq. ), and EPA will submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. This action is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

Therefore, for the reasons stated in the preamble, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

Throughout this document whenever “we,” “us,” or “our” is used, we mean EPA.

On August 30, 2023 (88 FR 59834), EPA proposed to approve into the Indiana SIP revisions to 326 Indiana Administrative Code (IAC) Article 8 Volatile Organic Compound Rules sections 326 IAC 8-3-1 “Applicability and exemptions”, effective January 4, 2023, and 326 IAC 8-3-2 “Cold cleaner degreaser control equipment and operating requirements”, 326 IAC 8-3-3 “Open top vapor degreaser operation”, 326 IAC 8-3-4 “Conveyorized degreaser control equipment and operating requirements”, and 326 IAC 8-3-8 “Material requirements for cold cleaner degreasers”, effective June 9, 2021. An explanation of the Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements, a detailed analysis of the revisions, and EPA's reasons for proposing approval were provided in the notice of proposed rulemaking (88 FR 59834) and will not be restated here. The public comment period for this proposed rule ended on September 29, 2023.

During the comment period, EPA received two comments that expressed support for the proposed VOC rule revisions. Therefore, EPA is finalizing our action as proposed.

EPA is approving Indiana's VOC control rule sections 326 IAC 8-3-1, 326 IAC 8-3-2, 326 IAC 8-3-3, 326 IAC 8-3-4, and 326 IAC 8-3-8 as revisions to the Indiana SIP.

In this rule, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the Indiana Regulations described in section I of this preamble and set forth in the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 below. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents generally available through www.regulations.gov, and at the EPA Region 5 Office (please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more information). Therefore, these materials have been approved by EPA for inclusion in the SIP, have been incorporated by reference by EPA into that plan, are fully federally enforceable under sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of the effective date of the final rulemaking of EPA's approval, and will be incorporated by reference in the next update to the SIP compilation. 1

Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 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 14094 (88 FR 21879, April 11, 2023);

• 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 subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) because it approves a state program;

• Is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); and

• 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.

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).

Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629, February 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. 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.” 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.”

Indiana did not evaluate EJ considerations as part of its SIP submittal; the CAA and applicable implementing regulations neither prohibit nor require such an evaluation. EPA did not perform an EJ analysis and did not consider EJ in this action. Consideration of EJ is not required as part of this action, and there is no information in the record inconsistent with the stated goal of E.O. 12898 of achieving environmental justice for people of color, low-income populations, and Indigenous peoples.

This action is subject to the Congressional Review Act, and EPA will submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. This action is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by February 16, 2024. 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).)

For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

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).

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

Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2023-0624 in the subject line on the first page of your submission. All requests must be in writing and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before February 16, 2024. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections and hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).

In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2023-0624, by one of the following methods:

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

• Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001.

• Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the instructions at https://www.epa.gov/dockets/where-send-comments-epa-dockets.

Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along with more information about dockets generally, is available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

EPA issued a final rule, published in the Federal Register of October 8, 2020, (85 FR 63450) (FRL-10013-94), on its own initiative, in accordance with FFDCA sections 408(e) and 408(l)(6), 21 U.S.C. 346a(e) and 346a(1)(6), establishing time-limited tolerances for residues of kasugamycin, (3-O-[2-amino-4-[(carboxyimino-methyl)amino]-2,3,4,6-tetradeoxy-α-D-arabino-hexopyranosyl]-D-chiro-inositol), in or on almond at 0.04 parts per million (ppm); and almond, hulls at 0.4 ppm. These time-limited tolerances expire on December 31, 2023.

EPA received a request to extend the use of kasugamycin for this year's growing season. After having reviewed this submission, EPA concurs that an emergency condition continues to exist. EPA assessed the potential risks presented by residues of kasugamycin in or on the pertinent commodity. In doing so, EPA considered the safety standard in FFDCA section 408(b)(2) and decided that the necessary tolerances under FFDCA section 408(l)(6) would be consistent with the safety standard and with FIRA section 18. Further, EPA issued a final rule in the Federal Register of November 3, 2023 (88 FR 75503) (FRL-11517-01-OCSPP) that extended time-limited tolerances for multiple chemicals on various commodities in response to EPA's granting of emergency exemptions. EPA inadvertently omitted the detailed instructions for the revision of 40 CFR 180.614 Kasugamycin; tolerances for residues. Therefore, EPA is issuing this final rule to correct this omission.

The data and other relevant material have been evaluated and were discussed in the final rule that originally established the time-limited tolerances. Based on those data and information considered, the Agency reaffirms that extension of the time-limited tolerances will continue to meet the requirements of FFDCA section 408(l)(6). Therefore, the time-limited tolerances are extended until December 31, 2026. Although these tolerances will expire and are revoked on December 31, 2026, under FFDCA section 408(l)(5), residues of the pesticide not in excess of the amounts specified in the tolerances remaining in or on the commodities after that date will not be unlawful, provided the residues are present as a result of an application or use of a pesticide at a time and manner that was lawful under FIFRA, the tolerance was in place at the time of the application, and the residues do not exceed the level that was authorized by the tolerance. EPA will take action to revoke the tolerances earlier if any experience with, scientific data on, or other relevant information on this pesticide indicate that the residues are not safe. EPA will publish a document in the Federal Register to remove the revoked tolerances from the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). Time-limited tolerances for the use of the following pesticide chemical on a specific commodity are being extended:

Kasugamycin. Pursuant to a request by the California Department of Pesticide Regulation, EPA authorized under FIFRA section 18 the use of kasugamycin on almonds for control of bacterial blast in California. This regulation extends time-limited tolerances for residues of the pesticide kasugamycin and its metabolites and degradates in or on almond at 0.04 (ppm); and almond hulls at 0.4 ppm for an additional 3-year period. The tolerances will expire and are revoked on December 31, 2026.

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

The Codex has not established a MRL for kasugamycin in or on the commodity listed in this document.

This action establishes tolerances under FFDCA section 408(d). The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from review under Executive Order 12866, entitled “Regulatory Planning and Review” (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this action has been exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use” (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled “Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks” (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not contain any information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. ), nor does it require any special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled “Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations” (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

Since tolerances and exemptions that are established in accordance with FFDCA section 408(1)(6), such as the tolerances in this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. ), do not apply.

This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this action alter the relationships or distribution of power and responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government and the States or Tribal governments, on the relationship between the National Government and the States or Tribal Governments, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled “Federalism” (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled “Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments” (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this action. In addition, this action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq. ).

This action does not involve any technical standards that would require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).

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

Therefore, for the reasons stated in the preamble, EPA is amending 40 CFR chapter I as follows:

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Memorandum M-24-05 “Catalyzing Sustainable Transportation Through Federal Travel” (issued December 14, 2023) provides guidance for implementing Executive Order (E.O.) 14057, Catalyzing Clean Energy Industries and Jobs through Federal Sustainability. OMB Memo M-24-05 directs Federal agencies to prioritize sustainable transportation options for official travel whenever possible and lead by example as an organization working toward net-zero emissions operations by 2050.

The FTR already encourages measures that promote sustainability, but the transition to clean energy provides additional opportunities for Federal travelers to support sustainable initiatives through the use of clean technologies. Title 5 of the United States Code (U.S.C.), section 5733, states in part “[t]he travel of an employee shall be by the most expeditious means of transportation practicable,” which the FTR expands upon by directing agencies to select the method of transportation most advantageous to the Government when cost and other factors are considered. Energy conservation is an element of sustainability and is one of several non-cost elements required to be considered by agencies when selecting the most advantageous method of transportation (FTR §§ 301-10.4, 301-70.100, and 301-70.101 (41 CFR)).

GSA Bulletin FTR 24-02 can be viewed in its entirety at https://www.gsa.gov/ftrbulletins.

The BLM is establishing this final supplementary rule under the authority of 43 CFR 8365.1-6, which allows state directors to establish supplementary rules for the protection of persons, property, public lands, and resources. This final supplementary rule applies to public lands managed by the Moab Field Office. A map of the management area and boundaries can be obtained by contacting the Moab Field Office (see ADDRESSES section above).

The final supplementary rule will be available for inspection in the Moab Field Office or on the ePlanning website.

The public lands managed by the BLM Moab Field Office in southeastern Utah are a domestic and international tourist destination hosting three million visitors per year. The Moab Canyons Special Wildlife Area, which consists of 10,044 acres in and along the walls and rims of Mineral and Hell Roaring Canyons as well as on the canyon walls and rims along the Green River corridor connecting these two canyons, provides important habitat for the Mexican spotted owl (a federally threatened species); golden eagles and other raptors; Utah's only endemic herd of desert bighorn sheep; and other wildlife. In recent years, roped and aerial recreational activities have increased in these canyons, putting wildlife and their vital habitats at risk. The goal of this supplementary rule is to protect vital wildlife habitat from the impacts of roped and aerial recreational activities.

In June 2021, the BLM issued a Decision Record and Finding of No Significant Impact that prohibited rock climbing except when and where permitted; prohibited other roped and aerial activities; and prohibited the construction or installation of temporary structures in the Moab Canyons Special Wildlife Area. The Decision Record created a permit system that allows a limited amount of rock climbing, seasonally, on specific climbs in designated areas. More specifically, the permit system prohibits rock climbing permits during critical wildlife seasons and otherwise limits the number of permits to 35 per year. In accordance with 43 CFR 2932.11(b)(1), the Decision Record required that all persons must obtain a permit to rock climb in the special area. The Decision Record also outlined the need to establish a corresponding supplementary rule for the special area.

The Decision Record was supported by an environmental assessment (EA) that analyzed two action alternatives: a total year-round ban on aerial and roped activities, and the institution of a limited seasonal permit system allowing some rock-climbing activity at specified locations. During the 30-day public comment period for the EA, the BLM received 13 comments. Seven comments supported the total year-round ban on aerial and roped activities in Mineral and Hell Roaring Canyons. Six commenters opposed some or all of that proposal and expressed an interest in greater access for roped and aerial activities. The BLM considered these public comments in the decision-making process.

The BLM published the proposed supplementary rule in the Federal Register on January 31, 2023 (88 FR 6217). During the 60-day public comment period on the proposed supplementary rule, the BLM received 19 comments; four were fully supportive of the rule and three were opposed. One commenter asked that the restrictions not apply to permitted events and another commenter asked for voluntary seasonal restrictions. The remaining 10 commentors asked that highline use (an aerial activity involving walking across rope or wire between two high points) be allowed on a seasonal basis to access the Colorado Bowl (also known as the Veggie Bowl).

The final supplementary rule prohibits rock climbing except when and where permitted; prohibits other roped and aerial activities; and prohibits the construction or installation of temporary structures in the Moab Canyons Special Wildlife Area (in and near Mineral and Hell Roaring Canyons). This rule will protect vital wildlife habitat from the impacts of roped and aerial recreational activities.

Rock climbing and other roped and aerial activities allow human access into otherwise inaccessible habitats. Other forms of recreation ( e.g., hiking, driving, camping, horseback riding) and other public land uses, such as livestock grazing, cannot reach those areas. Rock climbing and other aerial and roped activities adversely affect the threatened Mexican spotted owl, golden eagles, and other raptors, because rock climbers and aerialists access the cliffs used by these species for nesting, foraging, and resting. In addition, desert bighorn sheep use the talus slopes below the cliffs accessed by rock climbers and aerialists as escape terrain for the critical life functions that make herd viability possible. Restrictions have already been placed on motorized vehicle use, camping, livestock grazing, and mineral development in these canyons to protect these species through the 2008 Moab Resource Management Plan.

This final supplementary rule is not a significant regulatory action and is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866 as amended by Executive Order 14094. The final supplementary rule will not have an annual effect of $200 million or more on the economy. It will not adversely affect, in a material way, the economy; productivity; competition; jobs; the environment; public health or safety; or State, local, or Tribal governments or communities. The final supplementary rule will not create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency. The final supplementary rule will not materially alter the budgetary effects of entitlements, grants, user fees, loan programs, or the rights or obligations of their recipients; nor does it raise novel legal or policy issues. The final rule merely establishes rules of conduct for public use on a limited area of public lands.

This final supplementary rule is consistent with and necessary to properly implement the decision, which was analyzed in EA DOI-BLM-UT-Y010-2020-0068-EA. The approved environmental analysis is available for review at the physical and online locations identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Congress enacted the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) of 1980, as amended (5 U.S.C. 601-612), to ensure that government regulations do not unnecessarily or disproportionately burden small entities. The RFA requires a regulatory flexibility analysis if a rule has a significant economic impact, either detrimental or beneficial, on a substantial number of small entities. The final supplementary rule merely establishes a rule of conduct for public use on a limited area of public lands. Therefore, the BLM has determined the final supplementary rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

The final supplementary rule is not “major” as defined under 5 U.S.C. 804(2). The final supplementary rule merely establishes rules of conduct for public use on a limited area of public lands and will not affect commercial or business activities of any kind.

The final supplementary rule will not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or Tribal governments in the aggregate, or the private sector of more than $100 million per year; nor will it have a significant or unique effect on small governments. The final supplementary rule will have no effect on State, local, or Tribal governments and will impose no requirements on any of these entities. The final supplementary rule will merely establish a rule of conduct for public use on a limited selection of public lands and will not affect Tribal, commercial, or business activities of any kind. Therefore, the BLM is not required to prepare a statement containing the information required by the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. ).

The final supplementary rule does not have significant takings implications, nor is it capable of interfering with constitutionally protected property rights. The final supplementary rule merely establishes a rule of conduct for public use on a limited area of public lands and will not affect protected property rights. Therefore, the Department of the Interior has determined the final supplementary rule will not cause a “taking” of private property or require preparation of a takings assessment under this Executive order.

The final supplementary rule will not have a substantial direct effect on the States; the relationship between the Federal Government and the States; nor the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. The final supplementary rule does not conflict with any State law or regulation. Therefore, in accordance with Executive Order 13132, the BLM has determined the supplementary rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

Under Executive Order 12988, the Department of the Interior Office of the Solicitor has determined the final supplementary rule will not unduly burden the judicial system and that it meets the requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of the order.

In accordance with Executive Order 13175, the BLM considered consultation and coordination with Tribal governments in the development of the EA, which forms the basis for the final supplementary rule. It was determined the EA's proposed action did not have Tribal implications and formal consultation was not conducted.

Under Executive Order 13211, the BLM has determined the final supplementary rule will not comprise a significant energy action and that it will not have an adverse effect on energy supplies, production, or consumption.

The final supplementary rule does not contain information collection requirements that the Office of Management and Budget must approve under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Federal criminal investigations or prosecutions may result from this rule, and the collection of information for these purposes is exempt from the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3518(c)(1).

The principal author of this final supplementary rule is Kathleen Stevens, outdoor recreation planner, Moab Field Office, Bureau of Land Management

For the reasons stated in the preamble, and under the authority of 43 U.S.C. 1740 and 43 CFR 8365.1-6, the Utah State Director establishes the following supplementary rule:

1. Roped and aerial activities are prohibited within the Moab Canyons Special Wildlife Area, except for permitted rock climbing.

2. All persons must be in possession of a permit to engage in rock climbing within the Moab Canyons Special Wildlife Area.

3. The construction or installation of temporary structures is prohibited within the Moab Canyons Special Wildlife Area.

Roped Activities: Activities involving ropes, cable, vectran, rock climbing aids, webbing, anchors, or any other similar materials. Activities include: ziplining, high-lining, slacklining, rope-swinging, and other activities using the roped materials listed and other associated equipment.

Aerial Activities: Sporting pursuits which include “buildings, antennae, spans, and earth” (BASE) jumping, catapulting, paragliding, paramotoring, parachuting, skydiving, drone launching, aerial delivery, or other activities that involve aerial delivery, recovery, or shuttle.

Rock climbing: A sport or technique in which participants climb up, down, or across natural rock formations, usually with ropes and other equipment. This also includes free-soloing and bouldering.

On public lands under section 303(a) of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1733(a)), and 43 CFR 8360.0-7, any person who violates this supplementary rule may be tried before a U.S. magistrate and fined no more than $1,000 or imprisoned for no more than 12 months or both. Such violations may also be subject to enhanced fines provided for by 18 U.S.C. 3571.

Any Federal, State, local, or military persons acting within the scope of their duties, and members of an organized rescue or firefighting force in performance of an official duty, are exempted from this supplementary rule.

The reef fish fishery of the Gulf is managed under the Fishery Management Plan for the Reef Fish Resources of the Gulf of Mexico (FMP). The FMP was prepared by the Council and approved and implemented by NMFS through regulations at 50 CFR part 622 under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act). Section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act provides the legal authority for the promulgation of emergency regulations (16 U.S.C. 1855(c)).

The Magnuson-Stevens Act requires NMFS and regional fishery management councils to prevent overfishing and achieve, on a continuing basis, the optimum yield from federally managed fish stocks. These mandates are intended to ensure fishery resources are managed for the greatest overall benefit to the nation, particularly with respect to providing food production and recreational opportunities, and protecting marine ecosystems.

Gulf greater amberjack has been under a rebuilding plan since 2003 (68 FR 39898, July 3, 2003). However, the stock has not rebuilt as expected and NMFS has implemented several revisions to the rebuilding plan. The most recent revision occurred in response to the Southeast Data, Assessment, and Review (SEDAR) 70 assessment for Gulf greater amberjack, which was completed in November 2020 and indicated that the Gulf greater amberjack stock continued to be overfished and undergoing overfishing, but could rebuild by end of the current rebuilding time (2027) with reduced yields. Therefore, the Council developed and NMFS approved and implemented Amendment 54 to the FMP, which substantially reduced the Gulf greater amberjack catch limits. NMFS published the final rule reducing the catch limits on June 15, 2023 (88 FR 39193). On June 18, 2023, NMFS prohibited further commercial harvest for the 2023 fishing year because commercial landings had exceeded the reduced commercial annual catch target (ACT) and annual catch limit (ACL), which are 93,930 lb (42,606 kg), round weight, and 101,000 lb (45,813 kg), round weight, respectively (88 FR 40121, June 21, 2023).

The Gulf greater amberjack commercial accountability measures (AMs) require a closure of the sector when commercial landings reach or are projected to reach the commercial ACT (commercial quota) (50 CFR 622.41(a)(1)). In addition, if commercial landings exceed the commercial ACL, NMFS is required to reduce both the commercial ACL and the commercial ACT for Gulf greater amberjack in the year following an overage of the commercial ACL, by the amount of any commercial ACL overage (50 CFR 622.41(a)(1)(ii)). Because 2023 commercial landings exceeded the newly implemented commercial ACL, NMFS reduced the commercial ACL and ACT for the 2024 fishing year, by the amount of the 2023 commercial ACL overage (88 FR 80995, November 21, 2023), which was 35,280 lb (16,003 kg), round weight.

At its October 2023 meeting, the Council approved a framework action to modify the Gulf greater amberjack recreational fixed closed season and the commercial trip limit (Framework Action). Within the Framework Action, the Council recommended reducing the current commercial trip limit to 7 fish as a result of the substantial catch limit reductions implemented with Amendment 54 in order to extend the commercial fishing season. As described in the Framework Action, a trip limit of 7 fish is approximately equal to 210 lb (95 kg), gutted weight; 218 lb (99 kg), round weight. The current commercial trip limit for Gulf greater amberjack is 1,000 lb (454 kg), gutted weight; 1,040 lb (474 kg), round weight, until 75 percent of the commercial quota (commercial ACT) is reached. After 75 percent of the commercial quota is reached or projected to be reached, the trip limit is reduced to 250 lb (113 kg), gutted weight; 260 lb (118 kg), round weight.

The 2024 commercial fishing season opens on January 1 and with the current trip limit, NMFS projects that commercial landings would reach the reduced commercial ACT in early February, requiring a closure for the remainder of the year. If the 7-fish trip limit were in place by January 1, 2024, NMFS projects the commercial fishing season would be open through the end of February when a 3-month seasonal closure begins, and re-open for part of June when the season reopens June 1.

At its October 2023 meeting, the Council discussed concerns raised by its Reef Fish Advisory Panel about the impact of the required reduction to the 2024 commercial catch limits as a result of landings exceeding the ACL in 2023. The Council expressed concern about NMFS' ability to constrain landings to the reduced catch limits when the commercial season opens in January and the potential for additional commercial overages in 2024 further reducing harvest for 2025. The reduced commercial trip limit in the Framework Action, if implemented, would not be effective until spring of 2024. Therefore, the Council requested that NMFS implement an emergency action to reduce the Gulf greater amberjack commercial trip limit to 7 fish effective January 1, 2024. The Council and NMFS expect this lower trip limit to benefit the greater amberjack stock by increasing the duration of the open season, which is expected to result in fewer regulatory discards ( i.e., discards required after the quota has been reached). The reduced trip limit is also expected to shift the commercial greater amberjack harvest to an incidental catch only fishery for fishermen who currently target Gulf greater amberjack commercially under a higher trip limit, reducing the likelihood of race-to-fish (derby) fishing, which will allow NMFS to better determine when the commercial ACT will be reached and prohibit further harvest during the fishing year.

NMFS' Policy Guidelines for the Use of Emergency Rules (62 FR 44421, August 21, 1997) list three criteria for determining whether an emergency exists. Specifically, NMFS' policy guidelines require that an emergency: “(1) Result from recent, unforeseen events or recently discovered circumstances; and (2) Present serious conservation or management problems in the fishery; and (3) Can be addressed through emergency regulations for which the immediate benefits outweigh the value of advance notice, public comment, and deliberative consideration of the impacts on participants to the same extent as would be expected under the normal rulemaking process.” NMFS issues this emergency action in compliance with these guidelines to prevent serious conservation issues to the stock that would increase the probability of not meeting the rebuilding timeline of 2027.

With respect to the first criterion, the recently discovered circumstance is the extent of the overage of the commercial ACL in 2023 and the impact the required commercial ACT overage adjustment (payback) will have on the 2024 season. The Gulf greater amberjack stock has been under a rebuilding plan since 2003. The recent change to the rebuilding plan in Amendment 54 was implemented in June 2023 and resulted in a significant reduction in the catch limits. This reduction caused the commercial ACL to be exceeded earlier in the 2023 fishing year, thus requiring a commercial ACL and ACT payback and lower commercial catch levels in 2024. At the time of the Council's request for the emergency action, it appeared that the required reduction in the commercial catch limits would result in a 2024 commercial season as short as 2 weeks. After further review, NMFS determined that if no change were made to the trip limit, the commercial season would likely close at the end of January or beginning of February. However, there is substantial uncertainty in the projections because it is unclear whether the shorter season will induce fishermen to increase effort. NMFS expects the reduced trip limit implemented though the emergency action to slow harvest by lowering the financial incentive to target greater amberjack and engage in derby fishing, and increase the length of the 2024 commercial fishing season by 4-5 weeks. In combination with the fixed seasonal closure, which occurs March through May, commercial fishing could occur from January through February and then into June.

The second criterion, which requires a serious conservation or management problem in the fishery, is satisfied because the uncertainty associated with projecting when to close fishing under the current trip limit increases the likelihood of exceeding the reduced ACT and ACL, which were required to account for the excess commercial harvest in 2023. The Gulf greater amberjack stock has been overfished since the first assessment in 2000 and various plans that have been implemented to rebuild the stock have not been successful. Amendment 54 significantly reduced catch levels to rebuild the stock by the end of the current rebuilding period in 2027. Harvest in excess of these catch limits increases the probability of not meeting the established rebuilding time. NMFS expects the reduced commercial trip limit to eliminate trips targeting greater amberjack because those trips would be economically infeasible. This will discourage derby fishing and increase the length of the fishing season, which would decrease regulatory discards and allow NMFS more time to determine when to prohibit further harvest in 2024 so as to not exceed the catch limits.

To address the third criterion, NMFS has determined that because the next commercial fishing season opens January 1, 2024, the immediate benefits of reducing the trip limit through an emergency action outweigh the value of advance notice and public comment. By foregoing the notice and comment rulemaking, this emergency action will be able to fulfill its intent by slowing commercial harvest, eliminating the incentive to engage in derby fishing, which can result in unsafe fishing conditions, and reducing the likelihood of exceeding the reduced catch limits.

This final temporary rule revises the commercial trip limit for Gulf greater amberjack. It reduces the Gulf greater amberjack commercial trip limit to 7 fish from the current trip limit of 1,000 lb (454 kg), gutted weight, 1,040 lb (472 kg), round weight, with a step down in the trip limit to 250 lb (113 kg), gutted weight, 260 lb (118 kg), round weight, when 75 percent of the commercial ACT has been landed. The commercial trip limit will be effective for 180 days after publication in the Federal Register , as authorized by section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, or until superseded by another Federal action. This temporary final rule for emergency action will not be extended because NMFS expects the commercial ACT to be reached and the 2024 commercial season to be closed prior to the expiration of this rule. If this temporary rule were to expire prior to the commercial closure, fishing that could occur until the quota was reached would be under the reduced limit (stepdown) of 250 lb (113 kg), gutted weight, per trip (equivalent of approximately 8 fish). Therefore, an extension of this temporary final rule will be unnecessary.

This action is issued pursuant to section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, 16 U.S.C. 1855(c). The Assistant Administrator (AA) for Fisheries, NOAA has determined that this emergency action is consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the FMP, and other applicable law. This action is being taken pursuant to the emergency provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act and is exempt from Office of Management and Budget review.

The AA finds good cause to waive the requirements to provide prior notice and opportunity for public comment pursuant to the authority set forth in 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B). Providing prior notice and opportunity for public comment on this action would be contrary to the public interest.

In June 2023, NMFS implemented Amendment 54, which significantly reduced the Gulf greater amberjack catch levels in order to rebuild the stock. Commercial landings exceeded the 2023 commercial ACL, requiring a reduction of the commercial ACT and ACL for the 2024 fishing year. In October 2023, the Council voted to request that NMFS implement this emergency action to reduce the commercial trip limit as of January 1, 2024, consistent with its recommendation in the Framework Action approved at that same meeting. NMFS received the Council's request for emergency action on November 3, 2023, and therefore could not have acted sooner.

This change in the commercial trip limit requires immediate implementation. If NMFS were to provide prior notice and comment, NMFS would be unable to implement the change by January 1, 2024, which would increase the likelihood of exceeding the reduced catch limits that are necessary to rebuild the Gulf greater amberjack stock.

Maintaining the current 1,000 lb (454 kg), gutted weight, trip limit for the 2024 fishing year may induce fishermen who still target Gulf greater amberjack to increase their rate of harvest when the commercial season opens on January 1, 2024. This would increase the uncertainty for NMFS in projecting when to prohibit further commercial harvest and result in commercial landings in excess of the 2024 catch limits, which increases the probability of not meeting the established rebuilding time. The shorter open season that would occur under the 1,000 lb (454 kg), gutted weight, trip limit, would also increase the number of days fishermen who incidentally catch Gulf greater amberjack must discard the fish. Therefore, the reduced commercial trip limit must be implemented immediately and prior notice and opportunity for public comment would be contrary to the public interest.

The need to implement these measures immediately for the reasons stated above also constitutes good cause under authority contained in 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) to waive the 30-day delay in effectiveness of the rule.

This final temporary rule for emergency action is exempt from the procedures of the Regulatory Flexibility Act because the rule is issued without opportunity for prior notice and opportunity for public comment pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553 or other law. Accordingly, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required and none has been prepared.

For the reasons set out in the preamble, NMFS amends 50 CFR part 622 as follows:

This temporary rule immediately prohibits common pool vessel possession of Gulf of Maine (GOM) cod through the end of the fishing year on April 30, 2024, and closes the GOM Cod Trimester Total Allowable Catch (TAC) Area from January 1, 2024, through April 30, 2024. These actions are intended to prevent the common pool fishery from exceeding the common pool GOM cod Third Trimester TAC and common pool GOM cod annual sub-Annual Catch Limit (sub-ACL).

Recently available fishing year 2023 catch information shows that as of November 28, 2023, the Northeast Multispecies Common Pool fishery has caught 100 percent of its 10.6-metric ton (mt) sub-ACL for GOM cod. Regulations at 50 CFR 648.86(o)(1) provide that the Regional Administrator may implement or adjust the Days-at-Sea (DAS) possession limit to prevent an exceedance of the sub-ACL. In addition, regulations at § 648.82(n)(2)(iii) require a deduction of an amount equal to an overage from the common pool's sub-ACL in the next fishing year. To prevent a common pool overage of its 2023 sub-ACL for GOM cod, effective December 15, 2023, the GOM cod possession and trip limits are decreased to 0 pounds (lb) (0 kilograms (kg)), and possession is prohibited for all common pool vessels (table 1).

Common pool groundfish vessels that have declared their trip through the Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) or the interactive voice response system, and crossed the VMS demarcation line prior to December 15, 2023, are not subject to the new possession and trip limits for that trip.

Weekly quota monitoring reports for the common pool fishery are on our website at: https://www.greateratlantic.fisheries.noaa.gov/ro/fso/reports/h/nemultispecies.html. We will continue to monitor common pool catch through vessel trip reports, dealer-reported landings, VMS catch reports, and other available information and, if necessary, will make additional adjustments to common pool management measures.

Federal regulations at § 648.82(n)(2)(ii) require the Regional Administrator to close a common pool Trimester TAC Area for a stock when 90 percent of the Trimester TAC is projected to be caught. Based on recently available catch information, common pool vessel catch is projected to exceed the GOM cod Trimester 3 TAC as of November 28, 2023. Consequently, beginning January 1, 2024, through April 30, 2024, the GOM Cod Trimester TAC Area is closed. The closure applies to all common pool vessels fishing with gear capable of catching that stock, and remains in effect for the remainder of the trimester. During the closure, affected common pool vessels may not fish for, harvest, possess, or land regulated multispecies or ocean pout in or from the Trimester TAC Area for the stock.

The common pool fishery is currently in Trimester 2, which runs from September 1, 2023, through December 31, 2023. Current Trimester 1 and 2 catch amounts leave no Trimester 3 TAC available to catch. Regulations at § 648.82(n)(2)(iii) state that any overage or underage of common pool Trimester TACs in Trimesters 1 and 2 must be accounted for in the Trimester 3 TAC by deducting overages and adding underages to the Trimester 3 TAC. Common pool catch of GOM cod in Trimester 1 resulted in an overage of 3.3 mt, leaving only 1.9 mt available catch for the remainder of the year and Trimester 2. Deducting the Trimester 1 overage from the current Trimester 2 underage results in an overall overage of 1.9 mt that must be deducted from the Trimester 3 TAC. The Trimester 3 TAC is 1.9 mt, so this deduction results in a Trimester 3 TAC of 0 mt.

With a Trimester 3 TAC of 0 mt, any amount of catch in Trimester 3 would result in the common pool exceeding the Trimester 3 TAC and the common pool sub-ACL for GOM cod. Additionally, 90 percent of 0 is 0. As a result, we conclude that on January 1, 2024, the common pool fishery will have caught 90 percent of the Trimester 3 TAC.

Based on the above, effective on January 1, 2024, the Gulf of Maine Cod Trimester TAC Area is closed for Trimester 3, through April 30, 2024. The Gulf of Maine Cod Trimester TAC Area consists of statistical areas 513 and 514. During the closure, common pool vessels fishing with trawl gear, sink gillnet gear, and longline/hook gear, may not fish for, harvest, possess, or land regulated multispecies or ocean pout in or from this area. This closure of the GOM Cod TAC Area ends at the beginning of Trimester 1 of fishing year 2024 on May 1, 2024.

This action is required by 50 CFR part 648 and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.

The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA, finds good cause pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) and 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) to waive prior notice and the opportunity for public comment and the 30-day delayed effectiveness period because it would be impracticable, unnecessary, and contrary to the public interest.

The regulations require the Regional Administrator to close a trimester TAC area to the common pool fishery when 90 percent of the Trimester TAC for a stock has been caught. Updated catch information through November 28, 2023, only recently became available indicating that the common pool fishery is projected to have caught 90 percent of its Trimester 3 TAC for GOM cod, and 100 percent of its GOM cod sub-ACL. The time necessary to provide for prior notice and comment, and a 30-day delay in effectiveness, would prevent the timely closure of the GOM Cod Trimester TAC Area on January 1, 2024, and immediate prohibition of possession of the stock. Delay in closure would be contrary to the regulatory requirements and, with a delay in implementation of the possession prohibition would increase the likelihood that the common pool fishery would exceed its annual quota of GOM cod.

Any overage of the annual quota would be deducted from common pool's quota for the next fishing year, to the detriment of this stock. This could undermine conservation and management objectives of the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Management Plan. Prior notice and comment and a 30-day delay in effectiveness are unnecessary because fishermen were provided ample notice and opportunity to comment on the regulations that require this immediate closure. Fishermen expect these closures to occur in a timely way to prevent overages and their payback requirements. Overages of the trimester or annual common pool quota could cause negative economic impacts to the common pool fishery as a result of overage paybacks deducted from a future trimester or fishing year.

NMFS published a final rule on November 22, 2023, announcing changes to Federal requirements for service providers in the Pacific Coast Groundfish electronic monitoring program. This final rule also made minor administrative changes to other groundfish regulations to correct typos and update web addresses and other outdated references (88 FR 81354). This rule is effective December 22, 2023.

This action corrects the amendatory instructions to 50 CFR part 660 to correct additional typos that were left out of the original final rule; specifically changing the word “coop” to “co-op” when referring to harvest cooperatives. This correction is necessary to modify the incorrect regulatory instruction so that the implementing regulations are accurate.