Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 57 / Wednesday, March 25, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 15685 

minimize litigation, eliminate 

ambiguity, and reduce burden. 

10. Protection of Children 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Executive Order 13045, Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not 

an economically significant rule and 

does not create an environmental risk to 

health or risk to safety that may 

disproportionately affect children. 

11. Indian Tribal Governments 

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. 

12. Energy Effects 

This action is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ under Executive Order 

13211, Actions Concerning Regulations 

That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use. 

13. Technical Standards 

This rule does not use technical 

standards. Therefore, we did not 

consider the use of voluntary consensus 

standards. 

14. Environment 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Department of Homeland Security 

Management Directive 023–01 and 

Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, 

which guide the Coast Guard in 

complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA) (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 100 

yard safety zone around the barge 

ARCTIC CHALLENGER. The rule will 

prevent any vessel not involved with 

operational tests of the Arctic 

Containment System from approaching 

within 100 yards of ARCTIC 

CHALLENGER without permission of 

the Captain of the Port. This rule is 

categorically excluded from further 

review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 

2–1 of the Commandant Instruction. An 

environmental analysis checklist 

supporting this determination and a 

Categorical Exclusion Determination are 

available in the docket where indicated 

under ADDRESSES. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation 

(water), Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Security measures, 

Waterways. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 

CFR part 165 as follows: 

PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION 

AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 165 

is revised to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191, 

195; 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; 

Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department 

of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 

■ 2. Add § 165.T13–285 to read as 

follows: 

§ 165.T13–285 Safety Zone; ARCTIC 

CHALLENGER, Port of Bellingham; 

Bellingham, WA. 

(a) Location. The following areas are 

designated as a safety zone: All waters 

within 100 yards of the vessel ARCTIC 

CHALLENGER as it conducts 

operational tests of the Arctic 

Containment System within the waters 

of the Captain of the Port Zone Puget 

Sound. 

(b) Regulations. In accordance with 

the general regulations in subpart C of 

this part vessels not involved with the 

Arctic Containment System operational 

tests who wish to enter the zone must 

request permission for entry by 

contacting the Joint Harbor Operation 

Center at 206–217–6001 or the on-scene 

patrol craft on VHF–FM CH13. Once 

permission for entry is granted vessels 

must proceed at a minimum speed for 

safe navigation. 

(c) Dates. This rule is effective March 

25, 2015 through April 1, 2015. It is 

enforceable from 12 a.m. on March 11, 

2015 until 12 a.m. on April 1, 2015. 

Dated: March 11, 2015. 

M. W. Raymond, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port, Puget Sound. 

[FR Doc. 2015–06580 Filed 3–24–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2014–0677; FRL–9924–33] 

2-Propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, 2- 

methylpropyl ester, homopolymer; 

Tolerance Exemption 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an 

exemption from the requirement of a 

tolerance for residues of 2-propenoic 

acid, 2-methyl-, 2-methylpropyl ester, 

homopolymer; when used as an inert 

ingredient in a pesticide chemical 

formulation. Evonik Corporation 

submitted a petition to EPA under the 

Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act 

(FFDCA), requesting an exemption from 

the requirement of a tolerance. This 

regulation eliminates the need to 

establish a maximum permissible level 

for residues of 2-propenoic acid, 2- 

methyl-, 2-methylpropyl ester, 

homopolymer on food or feed 

commodities. 

DATES: This regulation is effective 

March 25, 2015. Objections and requests 

for hearings must be received on or 

before May 26, 2015, and must be filed 

in accordance with the instructions 

provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also 

Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION). 

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, 

identified by docket identification (ID) 

number EPA–HQ–OPP–2014–0677, is 

available at http://www.regulations.gov 

or at the Office of Pesticide Programs 

Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) 

in the Environmental Protection Agency 

Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William 

Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 

Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 

20460–0001. The Public Reading Room 

is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The telephone number for the 

Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, 

and the telephone number for the OPP 

Docket is (703) 305–5805. Please review 

the visitor instructions and additional 

information about the docket available 

at http://www.epa.gov/dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Susan Lewis, Registration Division 

(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, 

DC 20460–0001; main telephone 

number: (703) 305–7090; email address: 

RDFRNotices@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

You may be potentially affected by 

this action if you are an agricultural 

producer, food manufacturer, or 

pesticide manufacturer. The following 

list of North American Industrial 

Classification System (NAICS) codes is 

not intended to be exhaustive, but rather 

provides a guide to help readers 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
15686 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 57 / Wednesday, March 25, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

determine whether this document 

applies to them. Potentially affected 

entities may include: 

• Crop production (NAICS code 111). 

• Animal production (NAICS code 

112). 

• Food manufacturing (NAICS code 

311). 

• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS 

code 32532). 

B. How can I get electronic access to 

other related information? 

You may access a frequently updated 

electronic version of 40 CFR part 180 

through the Government Printing 

Office’s e-CFR site at http://

www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/textidx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/

40tab_02.tpl. 

C. Can I file an objection or hearing 

request? 

Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 

U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an 

objection to any aspect of this regulation 

and may also request a hearing on those 

objections. You must file your objection 

or request a hearing on this regulation 

in accordance with the instructions 

provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure 

proper receipt by EPA, you must 

identify docket ID number EPA–HQ– 

OPP–2014–0677 in the subject line on 

the first page of your submission. All 

objections and requests for a hearing 

must be in writing, and must be 

received by the Hearing Clerk on or 

before May 26, 2015. 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– 

2014–0677, by one of the following 

methods. 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be CBI or 

other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. 

• Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental 

Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/ 

DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. 

NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001. 

• Hand Delivery: To make special 

arrangements for hand delivery or 

delivery of boxed information, please 

follow the instructions at http://

www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html. 

Additional instructions on commenting 

or visiting the docket, along with more 

information about dockets generally, is 

available at http://www.epa.gov/

dockets. 

II. Background and Statutory Findings 

In the Federal Register of February 

11, 2015 (80 FR 7559) (FRL–9921–94), 

EPA issued a document pursuant to 

FFDCA section 408, 21 U.S.C. 346a, 

announcing the receipt of a pesticide 

petition (PP IN–10754) filed by Evonik 

Corporation, 299 Jefferson Rd., 

Parsippany, NJ 07054. The petition 

requested that 40 CFR 180.960 be 

amended by establishing an exemption 

from the requirement of a tolerance for 

residues of 2-propenoic acid, 

2-methyl-, 2-methylpropyl ester, 

homopolymer; (CAS Reg. No. 9011–15– 

8). That document included a summary 

of the petition prepared by the 

petitioner and solicited comments on 

the petitioner’s request. The Agency did 

not receive any comments. 

Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA 

allows EPA to establish an exemption 

from the requirement for a tolerance (the 

legal limit for a pesticide chemical 

residue in or on a food) only if EPA 

determines that the exemption is ‘‘safe.’’ 

Section 408(c)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA 

defines ‘‘safe’’ to mean that ‘‘there is a 

reasonable certainty that no harm will 

result from aggregate exposure to the 

pesticide chemical residue, including 

all anticipated dietary exposures and all 

other exposures for which there is 

reliable information.’’ This includes 

exposure through drinking water and 

use in residential settings, but does not 

include occupational exposure. Section 

408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to 

give special consideration to exposure 

of infants and children to the pesticide 

chemical residue in establishing an 

exemption from the requirement of a 

tolerance and to ‘‘ensure that there is a 

reasonable certainty that no harm will 

result to infants and children from 

aggregate exposure to the pesticide 

chemical residue . . .’’ and specifies 

factors EPA is to consider in 

establishing an exemption. 

III. Risk Assessment and Statutory 

Findings 

EPA establishes exemptions from the 

requirement of a tolerance only in those 

cases where it can be shown that the 

risks from aggregate exposure to 

pesticide chemical residues under 

reasonably foreseeable circumstances 

will pose no appreciable risks to human 

health. In order to determine the risks 

from aggregate exposure to pesticide 

inert ingredients, the Agency considers 

the toxicity of the inert in conjunction 

with possible exposure to residues of 

the inert ingredient through food, 

drinking water, and through other 

exposures that occur as a result of 

pesticide use in residential settings. If 

EPA is able to determine that a finite 

tolerance is not necessary to ensure that 

there is a reasonable certainty that no 

harm will result from aggregate 

exposure to the inert ingredient, an 

exemption from the requirement of a 

tolerance may be established. 

Consistent with FFDCA section 

408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the 

available scientific data and other 

relevant information in support of this 

action and considered its validity, 

completeness and reliability and the 

relationship of this information to 

human risk. EPA has also considered 

available information concerning the 

variability of the sensitivities of major 

identifiable subgroups of consumers, 

including infants and children. In the 

case of certain chemical substances that 

are defined as polymers, the Agency has 

established a set of criteria to identify 

categories of polymers expected to 

present minimal or no risk. The 

definition of a polymer is given in 40 

CFR 723.250(b) and the exclusion 

criteria for identifying these low-risk 

polymers are described in 40 CFR 

723.250(d). 2-propenoic acid, 

2-methyl-, 2-methylpropyl ester, 

homopolymer conforms to the 

definition of a polymer given in 40 CFR 

723.250(b) and meets the following 

criteria that are used to identify low-risk 

polymers. 

1. The polymer is not a cationic 

polymer nor is it reasonably anticipated 

to become a cationic polymer in a 

natural aquatic environment. 

2. The polymer does contain as an 

integral part of its composition the 

atomic elements carbon, hydrogen, and 

oxygen. 

3. The polymer does not contain as an 

integral part of its composition, except 

as impurities, any element other than 

those listed in 40 CFR 723.250(d)(2)(ii). 

4. The polymer is neither designed 

nor can it be reasonably anticipated to 

substantially degrade, decompose, or 

depolymerize. 

5. The polymer is manufactured or 

imported from monomers and/or 

reactants that are already included on 

the TSCA Chemical Substance 

Inventory or manufactured under an 

applicable TSCA section 5 exemption. 

6. The polymer is not a water 

absorbing polymer with a number 

average molecular weight (MW) greater 

than or equal to 10,000 daltons. 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 57 / Wednesday, March 25, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 15687 

7. The polymer does not contain 

certain perfluoroalkyl moieties 

consisting of a CF3- or longer chain 

length as specified in 40 CFR 

723.250(d)(6). 

Additionally, the polymer also meets 

as required the following exemption 

criteria specified in 40 CFR 723.250(e). 

8. The polymer’s number average MW 

of 55,000 is greater than or equal to 

10,000 daltons. The polymer contains 

less than 2% oligomeric material below 

MW 500 and less than 5% oligomeric 

material below MW 1,000. 

Thus, 2-propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, 2- 

methylpropyl ester, homopolymer meets 

the criteria for a polymer to be 

considered low risk under 40 CFR 

723.250. Based on its conformance to 

the criteria in this unit, no mammalian 

toxicity is anticipated from dietary, 

inhalation, or dermal exposure to 2- 

propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, 2- 

methylpropyl ester, homopolymer. 

IV. Aggregate Exposures 

For the purposes of assessing 

potential exposure under this 

exemption, EPA considered that 2- 

propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, 2- 

methylpropyl ester, homopolymer could 

be present in all raw and processed 

agricultural commodities and drinking 

water, and that non-occupational nondietary exposure was possible. The 

number average MW of 2-propenoic 

acid, 2-methyl-, 2-methylpropyl ester, 

homopolymer is 55,000 daltons. 

Generally, a polymer of this size would 

be poorly absorbed through the intact 

gastrointestinal tract or through intact 

human skin. Since 2-propenoic acid, 2- 

methyl-, 2-methylpropyl ester, 

homopolymer conforms to the criteria 

that identify a low-risk polymer, there 

are no concerns for risks associated with 

any potential exposure scenarios that 

are reasonably foreseeable. The Agency 

has determined that a tolerance is not 

necessary to protect the public health. 

V. Cumulative Effects From Substances 

With a Common Mechanism of Toxicity 

Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA 

requires that, when considering whether 

to establish, modify, or revoke a 

tolerance, the Agency consider 

‘‘available information’’ concerning the 

cumulative effects of a particular 

pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other 

substances that have a common 

mechanism of toxicity.’’ 

EPA has not found 2-propenoic acid, 

2-methyl-, 2-methylpropyl ester, 

homopolymer to share a common 

mechanism of toxicity with any other 

substances, and 2-propenoic acid, 2- 

methyl-, 2-methylpropyl ester, 

homopolymer does not appear to 

produce a toxic metabolite produced by 

other substances. For the purposes of 

this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has 

assumed that 2-propenoic acid, 2- 

methyl-, 2-methylpropyl ester, 

homopolymer does not have a common 

mechanism of toxicity with other 

substances. For information regarding 

EPA’s efforts to determine which 

chemicals have a common mechanism 

of toxicity and to evaluate the 

cumulative effects of such chemicals, 

see EPA’s Web site at http://

www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative. 

VI. Additional Safety Factor for the 

Protection of Infants and Children 

Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA 

provides that EPA shall apply an 

additional tenfold margin of safety for 

infants and children in the case of 

threshold effects to account for prenatal 

and postnatal toxicity and the 

completeness of the data base unless 

EPA concludes that a different margin of 

safety will be safe for infants and 

children. Due to the expected low 

toxicity of 2-propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, 

2-methylpropyl ester, homopolymer, 

EPA has not used a safety factor analysis 

to assess the risk. For the same reasons 

the additional tenfold safety factor is 

unnecessary. 

VII. Determination of Safety 

Based on the conformance to the 

criteria used to identify a low-risk 

polymer, EPA concludes that there is a 

reasonable certainty of no harm to the 

U.S. population, including infants and 

children, from aggregate exposure to 

residues of 2-propenoic acid, 

2-methyl-, 2-methylpropyl ester, 

homopolymer. 

VIII. Other Considerations 

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology 

An analytical method is not required 

for enforcement purposes since the 

Agency is establishing an exemption 

from the requirement of a tolerance 

without any numerical limitation. 

B. International Residue Limits 

In making its tolerance decisions, EPA 

seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with 

international standards whenever 

possible, consistent with U.S. food 

safety standards and agricultural 

practices. EPA considers the 

international maximum residue limits 

(MRLs) established by the Codex 

Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as 

required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4). 

The Codex 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 2-propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, 2- 

methylpropyl ester, homopolymer. 

IX. Conclusion 

Accordingly, EPA finds that 

exempting residues of 2-propenoic acid, 

2-methyl-, 2-methylpropyl ester, 

homopolymer from the requirement of a 

tolerance will be safe. 

X. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This action establishes a tolerance 

under FFDCA section 408(d) in 

response to a petition submitted to the 

Agency. The Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) has exempted these types 

of actions from review under Executive 

Order 12866, entitled ‘‘Regulatory 

Planning and Review’’ (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993). Because this action 

has been exempted from review under 

Executive Order 12866, this action is 

not subject to Executive Order 13211, 

entitled ‘‘Actions Concerning 

Regulations That Significantly Affect 

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66 

FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive 

Order 13045, entitled ‘‘Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, 

April 23, 1997). This action does not 

contain any information collections 

subject to OMB approval under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require 

any special considerations under 

Executive Order 12898, entitled 

‘‘Federal Actions to Address 

Environmental Justice in Minority 

Populations and Low-Income 

Populations’’ (59 FR 7629, February 16, 

1994). 

Since tolerances and exemptions that 

are established on the basis of a petition 

under FFDCA section 408(d), such as 

the tolerance in this final rule, do not 

require the issuance of a proposed rule, 

the requirements of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et 

seq.), do not apply. 

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 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
15688 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 57 / Wednesday, March 25, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

have a substantial direct effect on States 

or tribal governments, on the 

relationship between the national 

government and the States or tribal 

governments, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities among the 

various levels of government or between 

the Federal Government and Indian 

tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined 

that Executive Order 13132, entitled 

‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999) and Executive Order 13175, 

entitled ‘‘Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR 

67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply 

to this action. In addition, this action 

does not impose any enforceable duty or 

contain any unfunded mandate as 

described under Title II of the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 

1501 et seq.). 

This action does not involve any 

technical standards that would require 

Agency consideration of voluntary 

consensus standards pursuant to section 

12(d) of the National Technology 

Transfer and Advancement Act 

(NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). 

XI. Congressional Review Act 

Pursuant to the Congressional Review 

Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), EPA will 

submit a report containing this rule and 

other required information to the U.S. 

Senate, the U.S. House of 

Representatives, and the Comptroller 

General of the United States prior to 

publication of the rule in the Federal 

Register. This action is not a ‘‘major 

rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Agricultural commodities, Pesticides 

and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: March 16, 2015. 

Susan Lewis, 

Director, Registration Division, Office of 

Pesticide Programs. 

Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is 

amended as follows: 

PART 180—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 180 

continues to read as follows: 

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

■ 2. In § 180.960, add alphabetically the 

following polymer to the table to read as 

follows: 

§ 180.960 Polymers; exemptions from the 

requirement of a tolerance. 

* * * * * 

Polymer CAS No. 

*******

2-Propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, 2-methylpropyl ester, homopolymer, minimum number average molecular weight (in amu), 55,000 9011–15–8 

*******

[FR Doc. 2015–06690 Filed 3–24–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Parts 1 and 64 

[CG Docket No. 02–278; FCC 14–32] 

Cargo Airlines Association Petition for 

Expedited Declaratory Ruling 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Exemption. 

SUMMARY: In this document, the 

Commission grants a request to exempt 

package delivery notifications from the 

Telephone Consumer Protection Act’s 

(TCPA) restrictions on autodialed and 

prerecorded calls and messages to 

wireless telephone numbers, as long as 

consumers are not charged and may 

easily opt out of future messages if they 

wish, among other pro-consumer 

conditions. Congress gave the 

Commission the authority to exclude 

from this prohibition calls and texts that 

are not charged to the called party, 

subject to conditions necessary to 

protect the called party’s privacy rights. 

This action is necessary to allow 

wireless consumers to receive package 

delivery notifications that will be 

welcome both as a convenience and as 

a way to guard against package theft. 

DATES: Effective March 25, 2015. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kristi Lemoine, Consumer Policy 

Division, Consumer and Governmental 

Affairs Bureau, at (202) 418–2467 

(voice), or email kristi.lemoine@fcc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of the Commission’s Order, 

document FCC 14–32, adopted March 

27, 2014 and released on March 27, 

2014, in CG Docket No. 02–278. An 

Erratum to document FCC 14–32, was 

released on May 12, 2014. The full text 

of these documents and copies of any 

subsequently filed documents in this 

matter will be available for public 

inspection and copying via ECFS, and 

during regular business hours at the 

FCC Reference Information Center, 

Portals II, 445 12th Street SW., Room 

CY–A257, Washington, DC 20554. 

Document FCC 14–32 can also be 

downloaded in Word or Portable 

Document Format (‘‘PDF’’) at http://

www.fcc.gov/document/cargo-airlinepetition-declaratory-ruling. To request 

materials in accessible formats for 

people with disabilities (Braille, large 

print, electronic files, audio format), 

send an email to fcc504@fcc.gov or call 

the Consumer and Governmental Affairs 

Bureau at 202–418–0530 (voice), 202– 

418–0432 (TTY). 

Final Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

Analysis 

Document FCC 14–32 does not 

contain new or modified information 

collection requirements subject to the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 

1995, Public Law 104–13. In addition, 

therefore, it does not contain any new 

or modified information collection 

burden for small business concerns with 

fewer than 25 employees, pursuant to 

the Small Business Paperwork Relief 

Act of 2002, Public Law 107–198, see 44 

U.S.C. 3506(c)(4). 

Congressional Review Act 

The Commission will not send a copy 

of FCC 14–32 pursuant to the 

Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C 

801(a)(1)(A), because the Commission 

adopted no rules therein. Rather than 

adopting rules, the Commission 

exercised its statutory authority to grant 

an exemption by Order. See 47 U.S.C. 

227(b)(2)(C). 

Synopsis 

The Commission grants the Cargo 

Airline Association’s request to exempt, 

from the TCPA’s restrictions, its 

proposed free-to-end-user package 

delivery notifications to consumers’ 

wireless phones, subject to certain 

conditions. The TCPA prohibits making, 

without the prior express consent of the 

called party, any non-emergency call 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES