Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 88 / Monday, May 7, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 22921

44 Id.

45 15 U.S.C. 78q(a)(1).

46 146 Cong. Rec. S5230 (daily ed. June 14, 2000)

(statement of Sens. Hollings, Wyden, and Sarbanes).

47See e.g., In the Matter of Del Mar Financial

Services, Inc., et al., Exchange Act Release No.

42421 (Feb. 14, 2000); In the Matter of A.S.

Goldmen & Co., Inc., et al., Exchange Act Release

No. 41601 (July 7, 1999).

48Adopting Release, 62 FR at 6470.

49 Id.

50 146 Cong. Rec. S5221 (daily ed. June 15, 2000)

(statement of Sen. Leahy).

51See 146 Cong. Rec. S5230 (daily ed. June 15,

2000) (statement of Sens. Hollings, Wyden and

Sarbanes); 146 Cong. Rec. H4358 (daily ed. June 14,

2000) (statement of Rep. Dingell).

those standards require implementation

or application of a specific technology

or technical specification. Under the

Electronic Signatures Act, such

performance standards must: (1) Serve

an important governmental objective;

and (2) be substantially related to the

achievement of that objective.44 Even if

the electronic storage requirements of

Rule 17a–4(f) must be evaluated under

Section 104(b)(3)(A) of the Electronic

Signatures Act, they serve an important

governmental objective and are

substantially related to achieving that

objective.

1. The Electronic Storage Requirements

of Rule 17a–4(f) Serve an Important

Governmental Interest

Section 17(a)(1) of the Exchange Act

authorizes the Commission to issue

rules requiring broker-dealers to make

and keep for prescribed periods, and

furnish copies thereof, such records as

necessary or appropriate in the public

interest, for the protection of investors

or otherwise in furtherance of the

purposes of the Exchange Act.45 This

grant of authority recognizes the

importance of broker-dealer

recordkeeping to the Commission’s

regulatory function and investor

protection objective. Rule 17a–4,

adopted by the Commission pursuant to

this authority, sets forth the

requirements for keeping and furnishing

broker-dealer records. In so doing, the

rule serves the important governmental

interest of assisting adequate

supervision of broker-dealers by the

Commission and the SROs. During the

debate on the Electronic Signatures Act,

the importance of accurate

recordkeeping in regulated industries

was noted. To quote a statement by

Senators Hollings, Wyden and Sarbanes,

‘‘bank and other financial regulators

need to require that records be retained

in order that their examiners can insure

the safety and soundness of the

institutions and compliance with all

relevant regulatory requirements.’’ 46

Investor protection depends on the

examination process, which, in turn,

relies on the records that broker-dealers

are required to make and maintain. The

electronic storage requirements of Rule

17a–4(f) are designed to ensure that

broker-dealers will meet their obligation

under Section 17(a)(1) and Rule 17a–4

to promptly furnish legible, true and

complete copies of such records as are

requested by the Commission or its

representatives. This is crucial to the

Commission’s mandate to protect

investors. Accordingly, the

Commission’s regulatory function is

undermined to the extent that these

records are inaccurate, retained in a

non-accessible manner, or capable of

alteration. The Commission’s

enforcement record against

unscrupulous broker-dealers that have

changed or destroyed records

demonstrates how such conduct can

harm investors and the public interest.47

2. The Electronic Storage Requirements

of Rule 17a–4(f) Are Substantially

Related to the Important Governmental

Interest

The electronic storage requirements

are designed to ensure that the

Commission can promptly obtain

legible, true, and complete records.

Because the Commission relies on this

ability to fulfill its responsibilities, the

requirements are substantially related to

the Commission’s regulatory function.

The Commission, in the release

adopting the electronic storage

requirements of Rule 17a–4, noted the

‘‘importance for recordkeeping of ready

access, reliability, and permanence of

records.’’ 48 Therefore, the release made

clear that the electronic storage

requirements were intended as

‘‘safeguards against data erasure’’ and to

‘‘facilitate full access to the records

during examinations.’’ 49 As noted by

Senator Leahy, the Electronic Signatures

Act specifically authorizes agencies ‘‘to

set performance standards to assure the

accuracy, integrity, and accessibility of

records that are required to be

retained.’’ 50 Statements of Senators

Hollings, Wyden and Sarbanes, and of

Representative Dingell indicate that the

intent behind this section of the

Electronic Signatures Act was to allow

agencies to have standards designed to,

among other things, prevent companies

from retaining materials in an easily

alterable form.51 The electronic storage

requirements of Rule 17a–4(f), such as

WORM, are designed for this purpose.

IV. Conclusion

For the foregoing reasons, we find that

the electronic storage requirements of

Rule 17a–4(f) meet, and are consistent

with, the requirements of the Electronic

Signatures Act.

List of Subjects in 17 CFR Part 241

Securities.

Amendments to the Code of Federal

Regulations

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, the Commission is amending

title 17, chapter II of the Code of Federal

Regulations as set forth below:

PART 241—INTERPRETATIVE

RELEASES RELATING TO THE

SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

AND GENERAL RULES AND

REGULATIONS THEREUNDER

1. Part 241 is amended by adding

Release No. 34–44238 and the release

date of May 1, 2001 to the list of

interpretive releases.

Dated: May 1, 2001.

By the Commission.

Margaret H. McFarland,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 01–11333 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–U

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 173

[Docket No. 00F–1487]

Secondary Direct Food Additives

Permitted in Food for Human

Consumption

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration,

HHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug

Administration (FDA) is amending the

food additive regulations to provide for

the safe use of acidified sodium chlorite

solutions as a component of a post-chill

carcass spray or dip when applied to

poultry meat, organs, or related parts or

trim. This action is in response to a

petition filed by Alcide Corp.

DATES: This rule is effective May 7,

2001. Submit written objections and

requests for a hearing by June 6, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Submit written objections to

the Dockets Management Branch (HFA–

305), Food and Drug Administration,

5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville,

MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert L. Martin, Center for Food Safety

and Applied Nutrition (HFS–215), Food

and Drug Administration, Washington,

DC 20204–0001, 202–418–3074.

22922 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 88 / Monday, May 7, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a notice

published in the Federal Register of

September 11, 2000 (65 FR 54855), FDA

announced that a food additive petition

(FAP 0A4722) had been filed by Alcide

Corp., 8561 154th Ave., NE., Redmond,

WA 98052. The petition proposed to

amend the food additive regulations in

§ 173.325 Acidified sodium chlorite

solution (21 CFR 173.325) to provide for

the safe use of acidified sodium chlorite

solutions as a component of a post-chill

carcass spray or dip when applied to

poultry meat, organs, or related parts or

trim.

FDA has evaluated data in the

petition and other relevant material.

Based on this information, the agency

concludes that the proposed use of the

additive is safe, that the additive will

achieve its intended technical effect,

and, therefore, that the regulation in

§ 173.325 should be amended as set

forth below.

In accordance with § 171.1(h) (21 CFR

171.1(h)), the petition and the

documents that FDA considered and

relied upon in reaching its decision to

approve the petition are available for

inspection at the Center for Food Safety

and Applied Nutrition by appointment

with the information contact person

listed above. As provided in § 171.1(h),

the agency will delete from the

documents any materials that are not

available for public disclosure before

making the documents available for

inspection.

In the notice of filing, FDA gave

interested parties an opportunity to

submit comments on the petitioner’s

environmental assessment. FDA

received no comments in response to

that notice.

The agency has carefully considered

the potential environmental effects of

this action. FDA has concluded that the

action will not have a significant impact

on the human environment, and that an

environmental impact statement is not

required. The agency’s finding of no

significant impact and the evidence

supporting that finding, contained in an

environmental assessment, may be seen

in the Dockets Management Branch

(address above) between 9 a.m. and 4

p.m., Monday through Friday.

This final rule contains no collection

of information. Therefore, clearance by

the Office of Management and Budget

under the Paperwork Reduction Act of

1995 is not required.

Any person who will be adversely

affected by this regulation may at any

time file with the Dockets Management

Branch (address above) written

objections by June 6, 2001. Each

objection shall be separately numbered,

and each numbered objection shall

specify with particularity the provisions

of the regulation to which objection is

made and the grounds for the objection.

Each numbered objection on which a

hearing is requested shall specifically so

state. Failure to request a hearing for

any particular objection shall constitute

a waiver of the right to a hearing on that

objection. Each numbered objection for

which a hearing is requested shall

include a detailed description and

analysis of the specific factual

information intended to be presented in

support of the objection in the event

that a hearing is held. Failure to include

such a description and analysis for any

particular objection shall constitute a

waiver of the right to a hearing on the

objection. Three copies of all documents

are to be submitted and are to be

identified with the docket number

found in brackets in the heading of this

document. Any objections received in

response to the regulation may be seen

in the Dockets Management Branch

between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday

through Friday.

List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 173

Food additives.

Therefore, under the Federal Food,

Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under

authority delegated to the Commissioner

of Food and Drugs and redelegated to

the Director, Center for Food Safety and

Applied Nutrition, 21 CFR part 173 is

amended as follows:

PART 173—SECONDARY DIRECT

FOOD ADDITIVES PERMITTED IN

FOOD FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION

1. The authority citation for 21 CFR

part 173 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 342, 348.

2. Section 173.325 is amended by

removing ‘‘or’’ at the end of paragraph

(b)(1)(iii), removing the period at the

end of paragraph (b)(1)(iv) and adding ‘‘;

or’’ in its place, and adding paragraph

(b)(1)(v) to read as follows:

§ 173.325 Acidified sodium chlorite

solutions.

* * * * *

(b)(1)***

(v) As a component of a post-chill

carcass spray or dip solution when

applied to poultry meat, organs, or

related parts or trim.

* * * * *

Dated: April 27, 2001.

L. Robert Lake,

Director of Regulations and Policy, Center

for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition.

[FR Doc. 01–11330 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160–01–S

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[Region II Docket No. 45–216; FRL–6924–

3]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans; New York;

Motor Vehicle Inspection and

Maintenance Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection

Agency is announcing the approval of a

State Implementation Plan revision

submitted by New York. This revision

consists of New York’s demonstration of

the effectiveness of the enhanced motor

vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/

M) program decentralized testing

network which satisfies the

requirements of section 348 of the

National Highway Systems Designation

Act (NHSDA). In addition, EPA is

approving New York’s test method,

NYTEST, and its effectiveness in

relation to the IM240 test method and

the regulations implementing the

program. The intended effect of this

action is to fully approve New York’s

enhanced I/M program, a requirement of

the Clean Air Act.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule will be

effective June 6, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the State

submittals are available at the following

addresses for inspection during normal

business hours: Environmental

Protection Agency, Region II Office, Air

Programs Branch, 290 Broadway, 25th

Floor, New York, New York 10007–

1866; New York State Department of

Environmental Conservation, Division

of Air Resources, 50 Wolf Road, Albany,

New York 12233; and Environmental

Protection Agency, Air and Radiation

Docket and Information Center, Air

Docket (6102), 401 M Street, SW.,

Washington, DC 20460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Judy-Ann Mitchell, Air Programs

Branch, Environmental Protection

Agency, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New

York, New York 10278, (212) 637–4249.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

On October 2, 2000 (65 FR 58698),

EPA published a notice of proposed

rulemaking for the State of New York.

The notice proposed approval of

revisions to the State Implementation

Plan (SIP) for New York’s enhanced

inspection and maintenance (I/M)