[Federal Register: March 25, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 57)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 14375-14377]
[DOCID:fr25mr10-14]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0217; Directorate Identifier 2009-NE-23-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Pratt & Whitney (PW) PW4000 Series
Turbofan Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for PW PW4052, PW4056, PW4060, PW4062, PW4062A, PW4074, PW4077,
PW4077D, PW4084D, PW4090, PW4090-3, PW4152, PW4156, PW4156A, PW4158,
PW4164, PW4168, PW4168A, PW4460, and PW4462 turbofan engines. This
proposed AD would require initial and repetitive fluorescent penetrant
inspections (FPI) for cracks in the blade locking and loading slots of
the high-pressure compressor (HPC) drum rotor disk assembly. This
proposed AD results from reports of cracked locking and loading slots
in the HPC drum rotor disk assembly. We are proposing this AD to detect
cracks in the locking and loading slots in the HPC drum rotor disk
assemblies, which could result in rupture of the HPC drum rotor disk
assembly and damage to the airplane.

DATES: We must receive any comments on this proposed AD by May 24,
2010.

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to comment on this
proposed AD.
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building Ground
Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5

p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Contact Pratt & Whitney, 400 Main St., East Hartford, CT 06108;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, for information
identified in this proposed AD.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rose Len, Aerospace Engineer, Engine
Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send us any written relevant data, views, or
arguments regarding this proposal. Send your comments to an address
listed under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2010-0217; Directorate
Identifier 2009-NE-23-AD'' in the subject line of your comments. We
specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will consider
all comments received by the closing date and may amend the proposed AD
in light of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact
with FAA personnel concerning this proposed AD. Using the search
function of the Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any
of our dockets, including, if provided, the name of the individual who
sent the comment (or signed the comment on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review the DOT's complete Privacy
Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65
FR 19477-78).

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is
the same as the Mail address provided in the ADDRESSES section.
Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

Discussion

    We have received reports of 294 HPC drum rotor disk assemblies that
were removed because of cracks in the rear drum locking and loading
slots. We determined that the cracks resulted from thermal mechanical
fatigue. Cracks in rotating life-limited parts (LLPs), such as the HPC
rear drum of the HPC drum rotor disk assembly, could result in rupture
of that part.

Relevant Service Information

    We have reviewed and approved the technical contents of PW Service
Bulletins (SBs) PW4ENG 72-796, dated June 11, 2009, PW4G-100-72-186,
Revision 1, dated September 2, 2004, and PW4G-112-72-264, Revision 1,
dated September 2, 2004, that describe procedures for performing a
local FPI of the HPC drum rotor disk assembly blade locking and loading
slots for cracks.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an
unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on other products
of this same type design. We are proposing this AD, which would require
performing a repetitive local FPI for cracks in the HPC drum rotor disk
assembly blade locking and loading slots. The proposed AD would require
you to use the service information described previously to perform
these actions.

Interim Action

    These actions are interim actions and we may take further
rulemaking actions in the future.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 1,038 engines
installed on airplanes of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it would
take about 1 work-hour per engine to perform the proposed actions, and
that the average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. No parts are
required. Based on these figures, we estimate the total cost of the
proposed AD to U.S. operators to be $88,230.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
subtitle VII, part A, subpart III, section 44701, ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the proposed AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Would not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this proposed AD. You may get a copy of this summary at the
address listed under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

    Under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the
Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as
follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

    1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new
airworthiness directive:

Pratt & Whitney: Docket No. FAA-2010-0217; Directorate Identifier
2009-NE-23-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) must receive
comments on this

airworthiness directive (AD) action by May 24, 2010.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Pratt & Whitney (PW) PW4052, PW4056,
PW4060, PW4062, PW4062A, PW4074, PW4077, PW4077D, PW4084D, PW4090,
PW4090-3, PW4152, PW4156, PW4156A, PW4158, PW4164, PW4168, PW4168A,
PW4460, and PW4462 turbofan engines. These engines are installed on,
but not limited to, Boeing 747-400, 767-200, 767-300, 777-200, and
777-300 airplanes; McDonnell Douglas MD-11 airplanes; and Airbus
A300-600, A310-300, and A330-200 airplanes.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from reports of cracked locking and loading
slots in the high-pressure compressor (HPC) drum rotor disk
assembly. We are issuing this AD to detect cracks in the locking and
loading slots in the HPC drum rotor disk assemblies, which could
result in rupture of the HPC drum rotor disk assembly and damage to
the airplane.

Compliance

    (e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified unless the
actions have already been done.

Local Fluorescent Penetrant Inspection

    (f) Perform a local fluorescent penetrant inspection for cracks
in the HPC drum rotor disk assembly blade locking and loading slots
of the specific stages of the HPC drum rotor disk assemblies from
which any of the blades are removed as specified in Table 1 of this
AD.

     Table 1--Compliance Times and Service Bulletins by Engine Model
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      For engine model         Inspect whenever--           Use--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) PW4074, PW4077, PW4077D,  Any of the 13th or    Paragraphs 1.A.
 PW4084D, PW4090, and PW4090-  14th stage blades     through 1.B. of the
 3.                            are removed during    Accomplishment
                               a shop visit.         Instructions of
                                                     PW4G-112-72-264,
                                                     Revision 1, dated
                                                     September 2, 2004.
(2) PW4164, PW4168, and       Any of the 13th,      Paragraphs 1.A.
 PW4168A.                      14th, or 15th stage   through 1.C of the
                               blades are removed    Accomplishment
                               during a shop visit.  Instructions of
                                                     PW4G-100-72-186,
                                                     Revision 1, dated
                                                     September 2, 2004.
(3) PW4052, PW4056, PW4060,   Any of the 13th,      Paragraphs 1.A.
 PW4062, PW4062A, PW4152,      14th, or 15th stage   through 1.C. of the
 PW4156, PW4156A, PW4158,      blades are removed    Accomplishment
 PW4460, and PW4462.           during a shop visit.  Instructions of
                                                     PW4ENG 72-796,
                                                     dated June 11,
                                                     2009.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

     (g) Remove from service any HPC drum rotor disk assembly found
with a crack in the blade loading and locking slots of the HPC drum
rotor disk assembly.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

    (h) The Manager, Engine Certification Office, has the authority
to approve alternative methods of compliance for this AD if
requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

Related Information

    (i) Contact Rose Len, Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification
Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New England
Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, for more information
about this AD.
    (j) Pratt & Whitney Service Bulletins PW4ENG 72-796, dated June
11, 2009, PW4G-100-72-186, Revision 1, dated September 2, 2004, and
PW4G-112-72-264, Revision 1, dated September 2, 2004, pertain to the
subject of this AD. Contact Pratt & Whitney, 400 Main St., East
Hartford, CT 06108; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>,
for a copy of this service information.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on March 16, 2010.
Francis A. Favara,
Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-6581 Filed 3-24-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


P-16-0451 Sanitized Support Documents Index:
 P-16-0451 Sanitized Determination Document (linked)
 P-16-0451 Sanitized CHEM Report (attached)
 P-16-0451 Sanitized ECO Report (attached)
 P-16-0451 Sanitized ENG Report (attached)
 P-16-0451 Sanitized EXP Report (attached)
 P-16-0451 Sanitized Fate Report (attached)
 P-16-0451 Sanitized HLTH Report_POST-FOCUS FINAL (attached)


[Federal Register: August 10, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 153)]
[Notices]
[Page 48391-48393]
[DOCID:fr10au10-89]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-62631; File No. SR-Phlx-2010-102]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX PHLX, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to
Routing Fees

August 3, 2010.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on July 21, 2010, NASDAQ OMX PHLX, Inc. (``Phlx'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend its fees governing pricing for
Exchange members using the Phlx XL II system,\3\ for routing
standardized equity and index option customer and professional orders
to away markets for execution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ For a complete description of Phlx XL II, see Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 59995 (May 28, 2009), 74 FR 26750 (June 3,
2009) (SR-Phlx-2009-32). The instant proposed fees will apply only
to option orders entered into, and routed by, the Phlx XL II system.

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

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/micro.aspx?id=PHLXRulefilings,
at the principal office of the Exchange, at the Commission's Public
Reference Room, and on the Commission's Web site at http://www.sec.gov.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to recoup costs that the
Exchange incurs for routing and executing customer and professional
orders in equity and index options to away markets.
    In May 2009, the Exchange adopted Rule 1080(m)(iii)(A) to establish
Nasdaq Options Services LLC (``NOS''), a member of the Exchange, as the
Exchange's exclusive order router.\4\ NOS is utilized by the Phlx XL II
system solely to route orders in options listed and open for trading on
the Phlx XL II system to destination markets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59995 (May 28,
2009), 74 FR 26750 (June 3, 2009) (SR-Phlx-2009-32).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, the Exchange's Fee Schedule includes Routing Fees for
both customer and professional orders. The Exchange proposes to assess
a Routing Fee of $.26 per contract in customer option orders that are
routed to the International Securities Exchange LLC (``ISE'') and
subject to the ISE's Rebates and Fees for Adding and Removing Liquidity
in Select Symbols to apply only for orders of 100 contracts or more.
The Exchange proposes to assess a Routing Fee of $.31 per contract in
professional option orders that are routed to the International
Securities Exchange LLC (``ISE'') and subject to the ISE's Rebates and
Fees for Adding and Removing Liquidity in Select Symbols.
    The Exchange would continue to assess $.06 for all other customer
orders routed to ISE and $0.24 per contract for all other professional
orders routed to ISE, where those orders are not subject to the ISE's
Rebates and Fees for Adding and Removing Liquidity in Select Symbols or
the customer orders are for less than 100 contracts. The Exchange is
proposing to name these proposed fees ``ISE Select Symbols.'' The
Exchange also proposes to add a note to the Fee Schedule to indicate
that the fee for customer orders in ISE Select Symbols applies to
orders of 100 or more contracts. The Exchange is proposing this
amendment in order to recoup clearing and transaction charges incurred
by the Exchange when orders are routed to ISE in the ISE Select
Symbols, and in the case of customer orders for 100 or more contracts.
Each destination market's transaction charge varies and there is a
standard clearing charge for each transaction incurred by the Exchange.
The Exchange proposes this fee change to account for an increase in
cost for routing to ISE relative to the fees in the ISE Select
Symbols.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ ISE assesses a taker fee of $0.20 for priority customer
orders of 100 or more contracts and taker fee of $.25 for Customer
(Professional) orders in its rebates and fees for adding and
removing liquidity in select symbols. See Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 61869 (April 7, 2010), 75 FR 19449 (April 14, 2010) (SR-
ISE-2010-25).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to amend its Fee Schedule
is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act \6\ in general, and furthers
the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act \7\ in particular, in that
it is an equitable allocation of reasonable fees and other charges
among Exchange members. The Exchange believes that this fee is
reasonable because it seeks to recoup costs that are incurred by the
Exchange when routing customer and professional orders to ISE in the
select symbols, and for customer orders when the orders are for 100 or
more contracts, on behalf of its members. The Exchange also believes
that the proposed fee change to both customers and professionals is
equitable because it will be uniformly applied to all customers and
professionals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \8\ and paragraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4 \9\
thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed
rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if
it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml), or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-Phlx-2010-102 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2010-102. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/
shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than

those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File No. SR-Phlx-2010-102 and should be
submitted on or before August 31, 2010.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-19716 Filed 8-9-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register: May 3, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 85)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 25993-26000]
[DOCID:fr03my06-26]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0230; FRL-8060-9]

Inert Ingredients; Proposed Revocation of Tolerance Exemptions
with Insufficient Data for Reassessment

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: This document proposes under section 408(e)(1) of the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) to revoke the existing exemptions
from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of certain inert
ingredients because there are insufficient data to make the
determination of safety required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2), or because
they are redundant and, therefore, are not necessary. In addition, EPA
has identified substances within certain of these tolerance exemptions
that meet the definition of low-risk polymers and is proposing to
establish new tolerance exemptions for them. The revocation actions
proposed in this document contribute towards the Agency's tolerance
reassessment requirements under FFDCA section 408(q), as amended by the
Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996. By law, EPA is required by
August 2006 to reassess the tolerances that were in existence on August
2, 1996. The regulatory actions proposed in this document pertain to
the proposed revocation of 129 tolerance exemptions which would be
counted as tolerance reassessment toward the August 2006 review
deadline.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 3, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0230, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.

Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket (7502C), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket, Environmental
Protection Agency, Rm. 119, Crystal Mall 2, 1801 S. Bell St.,
Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal
hours of operation (8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays). Special arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information. The Docket telephone number is (703)
305-5805.
     Important Note: OPP will be moving to a new location the
first week of May 2006. As a result, from Friday, April 28 to Friday,
May 5, 2006, the OPP Regulatory Public Docket will NOT be accepting any
deliveries at the Crystal Mall 2 address and this facility
will be closed to the public. Beginning on May 8, 2006, the OPP
Regulatory Public Docket will reopen at 8:30 a.m. and deliveries will
be accepted in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S.
Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA 22202. The mail code for the mailing address
will change to (7502P), but will otherwise remain the same. The OPP
Regulatory Public Docket telephone number and hours of operation will
remain the same after the move.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2006-0230. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the docket without change and may be made available on-line at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information

provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or e-
mail. The Federal regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access''
system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you
send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through
regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and
included as part of the comment that is placed in the docket and made
available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot
contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your
comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters,
any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the docket index.
Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly
available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is

restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available in the electronic docket at http://www.regulations.gov, or,

if only available in hard copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket at
the location identified under ``Delivery'' and ``Important Note.'' The
hours of operation for this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket
telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kerry Leifer, Registration Division
(7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
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.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
    This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to certain entities. To determine
whether you or your business may be affected by this action, you should
carefully examine the applicability provisions in Unit II. If you have
any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a
particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. Background and Statutory Findings

A. What Action is the Agency Taking?

    1. Revocation because of insufficient data. EPA is now in the
process of reassessing all inert ingredient exemptions from the
requirement of a tolerance (``tolerance exemptions'') established prior
to August 2, 1996, as required by FFDCA section 408(q). Under FFDCA
section 408(q), tolerance reassessment may lead to regulatory action
under FFDCA section 408(e)(1). When taking action under FFDCA section
408(e)(1), EPA may leave a tolerance exemption in effect only if the
Agency determines that the tolerance exemption is safe. EPA is
proposing to revoke 129 inert ingredient tolerance exemptions because
insufficient data are available to the Agency to make the safety
determination required by FFDCA section 408(c)(2).
    In making the FFDCA reassessment safety determination, EPA
considers the validity, completeness, and reliability of the data that
are available to the Agency, FFDCA section 408 (b)(2)(D), and the
available information concerning the special susceptibility of infants
and children (including developmental effects from in utero exposure),
FFDCA section 408 (b)(2)(C). Data gaps exist for these inert
ingredients in areas critical to reassessment. Without these data, the
assessment of possible effects to infants and children cannot be made.
Thus, EPA has insufficient data to make the safety finding of FFDCA
section 408(c)(2) and is proposing to revoke the inert ingredient
tolerance exemptions identified in this document.
    In developing risk assessment documents for inert ingredient
tolerance exemptions, EPA currently reviews data submitted to the
Agency as well as information from reputable, publicly available
sources. For example, studies may be available in professional (peer-
reviewed) journals, and chemical assessments may be available on the
Internet from U.S. Government agencies (e.g., EPA, the Agency for Toxic
Substances and Disease Registry, National Institutes of Health, Food
and Drug Administration (FDA)) and international organizations (e.g.,
World Health Organization, Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD)). In some cases, representatives from chemical and
pesticide manufacturing industry associations endeavored to locate data
to support reassessment of surfactant chemicals. Nonetheless,
sufficient valid and reliable data were not available to make the
requisite FFDCA safety finding.
    EPA could not have made the requisite FFDCA safety finding unless,
at the very least, a set of basic toxicity studies had been available
to the Agency. It is possible that the tests agreed to under OECD's
Screening Information Data Set (SIDS) program would have sufficed.
Especially important to inert ingredient reassessment is an acceptable
repeat-dose study. The preferred test for repeat-dose toxicity is the
``Combined Repeated Dose Toxicity Study with the Reproduction/
Developmental Toxicity Screening Test'' (OECD Test Guideline 422). More
information about the OECD SIDS and EPA's High Production Volume (HPV)
programs is found at http://www.epa.gov/oppt/chemrtk/sidsappb.htm. In

some cases, the full OECD SIDS may not have been necessary because EPA
has available a limited number of studies and information on some of
the inert

ingredients in question (e.g., acute toxicity studies). In other cases,
the limited toxicity information available to the Agency may indicate a
need for further testing. EPA always recommends that parties interested
in supporting an inert ingredient consult with the Agency prior to
embarking on a testing strategy in order to determine existing data
gaps and if testing certain chemicals within a multi-chemical exemption
would serve to represent the entire exemption.
    The Agency is proposing to revoke one other inert ingredient
because it does not have sufficient data, as discussed earlier. The
inert ingredient's two tolerance exemptions in 40 CFR 180.1001(c) and
(e) were inadvertently removed from the CFR between the 1999 and 2003
editions. Since that time, 180.1001(c) and (e) have been renamed as 40
CFR 180.910 and 189.930, respectively. These tolerance exemptions were
omitted from the CFR by mistake, therefore, they are considered to be
active tolerance exemptions under 40 CFR 180.910 and 180.930 that are
subject to reassessment as required by the FFDCA section 408(q). The
tolerance exemption under 40 CFR 180.910 reads as follows: ``[alpha]-
Alkyl(C12-C15)-[omega]- hydroxypoly(oxyethylene)
sulfate, ammonium, calcium, magnesium, potassium, sodium, and zinc
salts; the poly(oxyethylene) content averages 3 moles.'' The name of
the tolerance exemption under 40 CFR 180.930 differs slightly but not
substantively, and reads as follows: ``[alpha]-Alkyl (C12-
C15)-[omega]-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) sulfate and its
ammonium, calcium, magnesium, potassium, sodium, and zinc salts; the
poly(oxyethylene) content averages 3 moles.'' As stated in this unit,
this inert ingredient does not has sufficient data and EPA is proposing
to revoke the tolerance exemptions in 40 CFR 180.910 and 180.930.
    In summary, the safety finding required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)
cannot be made for certain inert ingredient tolerance exemptions due to
insufficient data. Therefore, EPA is proposing to revoke under FFDCA
section 408(e)(1) the tolerance exemptions identified at the end of
this document under 40 CFR 180.910, 180.920, 180.930, and 180.940, with
the revocations effective 2 years after the date of publication of the
final rule in the Federal Register.
    EPA is planning to hold two identical public meetings about this
proposed action on inert ingredient tolerance exemptions with
insufficient data for reassessment. EPA will review its reassessment
progress for inert ingredients, describe the Agency's data finding
efforts, discuss data needs and the screening level studies that may
suffice, and other topics that may prove useful to those who are
considering developing data in support of these inert ingredients. Both
identical public meetings will be held on Tuesday, May 23, 2006, at the
Office of Pesticide Program's new office building located at One
Potomac Yard, 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA, 22202. The first
meeting will be held from 9 a.m. to 11 a.m. and the second meeting will
be from 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. In order to ensure adequate space for
attendees, the Agency requests an RSVP from those who are interested in
attending the public meetings. Please RSVP to Karen Angulo at either
(703) 306-0404 or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and indicate whether you prefer
the morning or afternoon meeting and the number of attendees in your
group. The formal announcement of these public meetings appears
elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.
    2. Five new tolerance exemptions for polymer chemicals--i.
Exemptions. Several of the tolerance exemptions discussed in this unit
include numerous chemicals. While EPA does not have sufficient data to
make the safety finding for all of the chemicals within these multi-
chemical exemptions, EPA has identified certain chemicals within these
exemptions that meet the criteria specified in accordance with the
Toxic Substances Control Act for defining a low-risk polymer under 40
CFR 723.250. Polymers that are eligible for exemption under 40 CFR
723.250 will not present an unreasonable risk of injury to human health
and the environment. Therefore, EPA is proposing to establish five
tolerance exemptions under 40 CFR 180.960.
    ii. 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.''
    Unlike other pesticides for which EPA has followed a cumulative
risk approach based on a common mechanism of toxicity, EPA has not made
a common mechanism of toxicity finding as to these chemicals and any
other substances and these chemicals do not appear to produce a toxic
metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has not assumed that these chemicals
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 the policy statements released by EPA's Office of
Pesticide Programs concerning common mechanism determinations and
procedures for cumulating effects from substances found to have a
common mechanism on EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative
.

    iii. Determination of safety for U.S. population, infants and
children. Dietary (food and drinking water) and residential risks are
not of concern for chemicals that meet the criteria specified for
defining a low-risk polymer in 40 CFR 723.250. Therefore, EPA finds
that exempting these polymer chemicals in 40 CFR 180.960 will be safe
for the general population including infants and children.
    iv. Analytical enforcement methodology. An analytical method is not
required for the new tolerance exemption for enforcement purposes
because the Agency is establishing an exemption from the requirement of
a tolerance.
    3. Revocations for administrative reasons. The Agency has
identified seven tolerance exemptions that can be revoked for
administrative reasons, as described in this unit.
    i. The Agency has determined that two tolerance exemptions describe
chemicals and substances that do not exist, and can be revoked on the
date of publication of the final rule in the Federal Register.
    a. The first exemption is ``Ethyl vinyl acetate (CAS Reg. No.
24937-78-8)'' under 40 CFR 180.930. This chemical name is wrong; the
correct name associated with this CAS Reg. No. is ``Ethylene, polymer
with vinyl acetate.'' This CAS Reg. No. already has a tolerance
exemption under 40 CFR 180.960 (polymers), therefore, the tolerance
exemption under 40 CFR 180.930 is unnecessary and can be revoked.
    b. The second exemption is for ``[alpha]-(Methylene (4-(1,1,3,3-
tetramethylbutyl)-o-phenylene)bis-[omega]-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene)
having 6-7.5 moles of ethylene oxide per hydroxyl group.'' This name is
in error because it describes a chemical that does not exist.
Therefore, the tolerance exemption under 40 CFR 180.930 can be revoked.
    ii. The Agency has identified five tolerance exemptions that can be
revoked because they are redundant. These redundant tolerance
exemptions are unnecessary and can be revoked on

the date of publication of the final rule in the Federal Register.
    a. The tolerance exemption ``Sodium mono- and dimethyl
naphthalenesulfonate; molecular weight (in amu) 245-260'' under 40 CFR
180.920 is unnecessary because there is an identically named exemption
in 40 CFR 180.910.
    b. The tolerance exemptions ``Sodium butyl naphthalenesulfonate''
under 40 CFR 180.920 and 180.930 can be revoked because they are
included in the broader tolerance exemptions ``Sodium mono-, di-, and
tributyl naphthalenesulfonates'' in 40 CFR 180.910 and 180.930.
    c. Similarly, the two tolerance exemptions called ``[alpha]-[p-
(1,1,3,3-Tetramethylbutyl) phenyl]-[omega]-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene)
produced by the condensation of 1 mole of p-(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)
phenol with an average of 4-14 or 30-70 moles of ethylene oxide; ...''
under 40 CFR 180.910 and 180.930 can be revoked because they are
included in the broader tolerance exemptions that are also in 40 CFR
180.910 and 180.930 that have ``[alpha]-[p-(1,1,3,3-
Tetramethylbutyl)phenyl]-[omega]-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) produced by
the condensation of 1 mole of p-(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)phenol with a
range of 1-14 or 30-70 moles of ethylene oxide;....''

B. What is the Agency's Authority for Taking this Action?

    A ``tolerance'' represents the maximum level for residues of
pesticide chemicals legally allowed in or on raw agricultural
commodities and processed foods. Section 408 of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 346a,
as amended by FQPA, Public Law 104-170, authorizes the establishment of
tolerances, exemptions from tolerance requirements, modifications in
tolerances, and revocation of tolerances for residues of pesticide
chemicals in or on raw agricultural commodities and processed foods.
Without a tolerance or exemption, food containing pesticide residues is
considered to be unsafe and therefore ``adulterated'' under FFDCA
section 402(a), 21 U.S.C. 342(a). Such food may not be distributed in
interstate commerce (21 U.S.C. 331(a)). For a food-use pesticide to be
sold and distributed, the pesticide must not only have appropriate
tolerances under FFDCA, but also must be registered under Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) (7 U.S.C. 136 et
seq.). Food-use pesticides not registered in the United States must
have tolerances in order for commodities treated with those pesticides
to be imported into the United States.

C. When do These Actions Become Effective?

    1. EPA is proposing to revoke the tolerance exemptions identified
in this document that have insufficient data effective 2 years after
the date of publication of the final rule in the Federal Register. Any
commodities listed in this proposal treated with pesticide products
containing the inert ingredients and in the channels of trade following
the tolerance revocations, shall be subject to FFDCA section 408(1)(5),
as established by FQPA. Under this section, any residues of these
pesticide chemicals in or on such food shall not render the food
adulterated so long as it is shown to the satisfaction of FDA that:
    i. The residue is present as the result of an application or use of
the pesticide at a time and in a manner that was lawful under FIFRA.
    ii. The residue does not exceed the level that was authorized at
the time of the application or use to be present on the food under a
tolerance or exemption from tolerance. Evidence to show that food was
lawfully treated may include records that verify the dates when the
pesticide was applied to such food.
    2. EPA is proposing the establishment of new tolerance exemptions
under 40 CFR 180.960 effective on the date of publication of the final
rule in the Federal Register.
    3. EPA is proposing to revoke for administrative reasons the
redundant and incorrect tolerance exemptions identified in this
document under 40 CFR 180.910, 180.920, and 180.930 effective on the
date of publication of the final rule in the Federal Register.

D. What is the Contribution to Tolerance Reassessment?

    By law, EPA is required by August 2006 to reassess the tolerances
and exemptions from tolerances that were in existence on August 2,
1996. This document proposes to revoke 129 inert ingredient tolerance
exemptions, which will be counted in a final rule as a tolerance
reassessment toward the August 2006 review deadline under FFDCA section
408(q), as amended by FQPA in 1996.

III. Are the Proposed Actions Consistent with International
Obligations?

    The tolerance revocation in this proposal is not discriminatory and
is designed to ensure that both domestically produced and imported
foods meet the food safety standard established by FFDCA. The same food
safety standards apply to domestically produced and imported foods.
    EPA is working to ensure that the U.S. tolerance reassessment
program under FQPA does not disrupt international trade. EPA considers
Codex Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs) in setting U.S. tolerances and in
reassessing them. MRLs are established by the Codex Committee on
Pesticide Residues, a committee within the Codex Alimentarius
Commission, an international organization formed to promote the
coordination of international food standards. It is EPA's policy to
harmonize U.S. tolerances with Codex MRLs to the extent possible,
provided that the MRLs achieve the level of protection required under
FFDCA. EPA's effort to harmonize with Codex MRLs is summarized in the
tolerance reassessment section of individual Reregistration Eligibility
Decision (RED) documents. EPA has developed guidance concerning
submissions for import tolerance support which was published in the
Federal Register of June 1, 2000 (65 FR 35069) (FRL-6559-3). This
guidance will be made available to interested persons. Electronic
copies are available on the Internet at http://www.epa.gov. On the Home

Page select ``Laws, Regulations, and Dockets,'' then select
``Regulations and Proposed Rules'' and then look up the entry for this
document under ``Federal Register--Environmental Documents.'' You can
also go directly to the ``Federal Register'' listings at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr
.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This proposed rule establishes a tolerance under section 408(d) of
FFDCA 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 proposed rule has
been exempted from review under Executive Order 12866 due to its lack
of significance, this proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order
13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This proposed
rule does not contain any information collections subject to OMB
approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq., or impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as
described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(UMRA) (Public Law 104-4). 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); or OMB review
or any Agency action under Executive Order 13045, entitled Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997). 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 of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law
104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
    Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), the Agency previously assessed whether establishment of
tolerances, exemptions from tolerances, raising of tolerance levels,
expansion of exemptions, or revocations might significantly impact a
substantial number of small entities and concluded that, as a general
matter, these actions do not impose a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. These analyses for tolerance
establishments and modifications, and for tolerance revocations were
published on May 4, 1981 (46 FR 24950) and on December 17, 1997 (62 FR
66020) (FRL-5753-1), respectively, and were provided to the Chief
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration. Taking into
account this analysis, and available information concerning the
pesticides listed in this proposed rule, the Agency hereby certifies
that this proposed action will not have a significant negative economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. Specifically, the
Agency has concluded in a memorandum dated May 25, 2001 that for import
tolerance revocation there is a negligible joint probability of certain
defined conditions holding simultaneously which would indicate an RFA/
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA)
concern and require more analysis. (This Agency document is available
in the docket of this proposed rule). Furthermore, for the pesticides
named in this proposed rule, the Agency knows of no extraordinary
circumstances that exist as to the present proposal that would change
the EPA's previous analysis. Any comments about the Agency's
determination should be submitted to EPA along with comments on the
proposal, and will be addressed prior to issuing a final rule.
    In addition, the Agency has determined that this action will not
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, as
specified in Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism (64 FR 43255,
August 10, 1999). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to develop an
accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input by State
and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have
federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism
implications'' is defined in the Executive order to include regulations
that have ``substantial direct effects 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.'' This proposed rule directly regulates growers, food
processors, food handlers, and food retailers, not States. This action
does not alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. For these same reasons, the Agency has
determined that this proposed rule does not have any ``tribal
implications'' as described in Executive Order 13175, entitled
Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR
67249, November 6, 2000). Executive Order 13175, requires EPA to
develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input
by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have
tribal implications.'' ``Policies that have tribal implications'' is
defined in the Executive order to include regulations that have
``substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal Government and the Indian tribes, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes.'' This proposed rule will not have
substantial direct effects on tribal governments, 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, as specified in Executive Order 13175.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this proposed rule.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: April 27, 2006.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
    Therefore, it is proposed that 40 CFR chapter I be 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.

Sec.  180.910  [Amended]

    2. In Sec.  180.910, the table is amended by removing the following
entries:
    a. [alpha]-Alkyl (C9-C18-[omega]-
hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) with poly(oxyethylene) content of 2-30 moles.
    b. [alpha]-(p-Alkylphenyl)-[omega]-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene)
produced by the condensation of 1 mole of alkylphenol (alkyl is a
mixture of propylene tetramer and pentamer isomers and averages
C13) with 6 moles of ethylene oxide.
    c. [alpha]-Alkyl (C6-C14)-[omega]-
hydroxypoly(oxypropylene) block copolymer with polyoxyethylene;
polyoxypropylene content is 1-3 moles; polyoxyethylene content is 4-12
moles; average molecular weight (in amu) is approximately 635.
    d. [alpha]-(p-tert-Butylphenyl)-[omega]-hydroxypoly (oxyethylene)
mixture of dihydrogen phosphate and monohydrogen phosphate esters and
the corresponding ammonium calcium, magnesium, monoethanolamine,
potassium, sodium, and zinc salts of the phosphate esters; the
poly(oxyethylene) content averages 4-12 moles.
    e. [alpha]-(o,p-Dinonylphenyl)-[omega]-hydroxypoly (oxyethylene)
mixture of dihydrogen phosphate and monohydrogen phosphate esters and
the corresponding ammonium, calcium, magnesium, monoethanolamine,
potassium, sodium, and zinc salts of the phosphate esters; the nonyl
group is a propylene trimer isomer and the poly(oxyethylene) content
averages 4-14 moles.
    f. [alpha]-(o,p-Dinonylphenyl)-[omega]-hydroxypoly (oxyethylene)
produced by condensation of 1 mole of dinonylphenol (nonyl group is a
propylene trimer isomer) with an average of 4-14 or 140-160 moles of
ethylene oxide.
    g. Dodecylbenzenesulfonic acid, amine salts.
    h. [alpha]-(p-Dodecylphenyl)-[omega]-hydroxypoly (oxyethylene)
produced by the condensation of 1 mole of dodecylphenol (dodecyl group
is a propylene tetramer isomer) with an average of 4-14 or 30-70 moles
of

ethylene oxide; if a blend of products is used, the average number of
moles of ethylene oxide reacted to produce any product that is a
component of the blend shall be in the range of 4-14 or 30-70.
    i. Ethylene oxide adducts of 2,4,7,9-tetramethyl-5-decynediol, the
ethylene oxide content averages 3.5, 10, or 30 moles.
    j. [alpha]-Lauryl-[omega]-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene), average
molecular weight (in amu) of 600.
    k. [alpha]-Lauryl-[omega]-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) sulfate, sodium
salt; the poly(oxyethylene) content is 3-4 moles.
    l. Manganous oxide.
    m. [alpha]-(p-Nonylphenyl)-[omega]-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) mixture
of dihydrogen phosphate and monohydrogen phosphate esters and the
corresponding ammonium, calcium, magnesium, monoethanolamine,
potassium, sodium, and zinc salts of the phosphate esters; the nonyl
group is a propylene trimer isomer and the poly (oxyethylene) content
averages 4-14 moles or 30 moles.
    n. [alpha]-(p-Nonylphenyl)-[omega]-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene)
sulfate, ammonium, calcium, magnesium, potassium, sodium, and zinc
salts; the nonyl group is a propylene trimer isomer and the
poly(oxyethylene) content averages 4 moles.
    o. Polyglyceryl phthalate ester of coconut oil fatty acids.
    p. Poly(methylene-p-tert-butylphenoxy)- poly(oxyethylene) ethanol;
the poly(oxyethylene) content averages 4-12 moles.
    q. Poly(methylene-p-nonylphenoxy)poly(oxyethylene) ethanol; the
poly(oxyethylene) content averages 4-12 moles.
    r. Secondary alkyl (C11-C15)
poly(oxyethylene) acetate, sodium salt; the ethylene oxide content
averages 5 moles.
    s. Sodium diisobutylnapthalenesulfonate.
    t. Sodium dodecylphenoxybenzenedisulfonate.
    u. Sodium isopropylisohexylnaphthalenesulfonate.
    v. Sodium lauryl glyceryl ether sulfonate.
    w. Sodium monoalkyl and dialkyl (C8-C16)
phenoxybenzenedisulfonate mixtures containing not less than 70% of the
monoalkylated product.
    x. Sodium mono- and dimethylnaphthalenesulfonates, molecular weight
(in amu) 245-260.
    y. Sodium mono-, di-, and tributyl naphthalenesulfonates.
    z. Sodium mono-, di-, and triisopropyl naphthalenesulfonate.
    aa. Sodium N-oleoyl-N-methyltaurine.
    bb. Sodium sulfite.
    cc. [alpha]-[p-(1,1,3,3-Tetramethylbutyl)phenyl]-[omega]-
hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) produced by the condensation of 1 mole of p-
(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)phenol with a range of 1-14 or 30-70 moles of
ethylene oxide: if a blend of products is used, the average range
number of moles of ethylene oxide reacted to produce any product that
is a component of the blend shall be in the range of 1-14 or 30-70.
    dd. [alpha]-[p-(1,1,3,3-Tetramethylbutyl) phenyl]-[omega]-
hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) produced by the condensation of 1 mole of p-
(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl) phenol with an average of 4-14 or 30-70
moles of ethylene oxide; if a blend of products is used, the average
number of moles of ethylene oxide reacted to produce any product that
is a component of the blend shall be in the range of 4-14 or 30-70.
    ee. Tridecylpoly(oxyethylene) acetate, sodium salt; where the
ethylene oxide content averages 6-7 moles.

Sec.  180.920  [Amended]

    3. In Sec.  180.920, the table is amended by removing the following
entries:
    a. [alpha]-Alkyl (C12-C18)-[omega]-
hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) copolymers with poly(oxypropylene);
polyoxyethylene content averages 3-12 moles and polyoxypropylene
content 2-9 moles.
    b. [alpha]-Alkyl (C12-C15)-[omega]-
hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) sulfosuccinate, isopropylamine and N-
hydroxyethyl isopropylamine salts of; the poly(oxyethylene) content
averages 3-12 moles.
    c. [alpha]-Alkyl(C10-12)-[omega]-
hydroxpoly(oxyethylene) poly(oxypropylene) copolymer; poly(oxyethylene)
content is 11-15 moles; poly(oxyproplene) content is 1-3 moles.
    d. [alpha]-Alkyl(C12-C18)-[omega]-hydroxypoly
(oxyethylene/oxypropylene) hetero polymer in which the oxyethylene
content averages 13-17 moles and the oxypropylene content averages 2-6
moles.
    e. [alpha]-Alkyl (C10-C16)-[omega]-
hydroxypoly(oxyethylene)poly(oxypropylene) mixture of di- and
monohydrogen phosphate esters and the corresponding ammonium, calcium,
magnesium, monoethanolamine, potassium, sodium, and zinc salts of the
phosphate esters; the combined poly(oxyethylene) poly(oxypropylene)
content averages 3-20 moles.
    f. [alpha]-Alkyl (C12-C18)-[omega]-
hydroxypoly(oxyethylene/oxypropylene) hetero polymer in which the
oxyethylene content is 8-12 moles and the oxypropylene content is 3-7
moles.
    g. [alpha]-Alkyl (C12-C15)-[omega]-
hydroxypoly(oxyethylene/oxypropylene) hetero polymer in which the
oxyethylene content is 8-13 moles and the oxypropylene content is 7-30
moles.
    h. [alpha]-Alkyl (C21-C71)-[omega]-
hydroxypoly (oxyethylene) in which the poly(oxyethylene) content is 2
to 91 moles and molecular weight range from 390 to 5,000.
    i. n-Alkyl(C8-C18)amine acetate.
    j. Amine salts of alkyl (C8-C24)
benzenesulfonic acid (butylamine, dimethylaminopropylamine, mono- and
diisopropylamine, mono- , di-, and triethanolamine).
    k. N-(Aminoethyl) ethanolamine salt of dodecylbenzenesulfonic acid.
    l. N,N-Bis[[alpha]-ethyl-[omega]-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene)
alkylamine; the poly(oxyethylene) content averages 3 moles; the alkyl
groups (C14-C18) are derived from tallow, or from
soybean or cottonseed oil acids.
    m. N,N-Bis(2-hydroxyethyl)alkylamine, where the alkyl groups
(C8-C18) are derived from coconut, cottonseed,
soya, or tallow acids.
    n. N,N-Bis 2-([omega]-hydroxypolyoxyethylene) ethyl) alkylamine;
the reaction product of 1 mole N,N-bis(2-hydroxyethyl)alkylamine and 3-
60 moles of ethylene oxide, where the alkyl group (C8-
C18) is derived from coconut, cottonseed, soya, or tallow
acids.
    o. N,N-Bis-2-([omega]-hydroxypolyoxyethylene/polyoxypropylene)
ethyl alkylamine; the reaction product of 1 mole of N,N-bis(2-
hydroxyethyl alkylamine) and 3-60 moles of ethylene oxide and propylene
oxide, where the alkyl group (C8-C18) is derived
from coconut, cottonseed soya, or tallow acids.
    p. Butoxytriethylene glycol phosphate.
    q. Cyclohexanol.
    r. [alpha]-(Di-sec-butyl)phenylpoly(oxypropylene) block polymer
with poly(oxyethylene); the poly(oxypropylene) content averages 4
moles, the poly(oxyethylene) content averages 5 to 12 moles, the
molecular.
    s. Disodium 4-isodecyl sulfosuccinate.
    t. Dodecylphenol.
    u. [alpha]-Dodecylphenol-[omega]-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene/
oxypropylene) hetero polymer where ethylene oxide content is 11-13
moles and oxypropylene content is 14-16 moles, molecular weight (in
amu) averages 600 to 965.

    v. Isopropylbenzenesulfonic acid and its ammonium, calcium,
magnesium, potassium, sodium, and zinc salts.
    w. (3-Lauramidopropyl) trimethylammonium methyl sulfate.
    x. Linoleic diethanolamide (CAS Reg. No. 56863-02-6).
    y. Methyl bis(2-hydroxyethyl)alkyl ammonium chloride, where the
carbon chain (C8-C18) is derived from coconut,
cottonseed, soya, or tallow acids.
    z. [alpha],[alpha]'-[Methylenebis]-4-(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)-o-
phenylene bis[[omega]-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene)] having 6-7.5 moles of
ethylene oxide per hydroxyl group.
    aa. Methylnapthalenesulfonic acid--formaldehyde condensate, sodium
salt.
    bb. Methyl poly(oxyethylene) alkyl ammonium chloride, where the
poly(oxyethylene) content is 3-15 moles and the alkyl group
(C8-C18) is derived from coconut, cottonseed,
soya, or tallow acids.
    cc. Methyl violet 2B.
    dd. Morpholine salt of dodecylbenzenesulfonic acid.
    ee. Napthalenesulfonic acid-formaldehyde condensate, ammonium and
sodium salts.
    ff. Partial sodium salt of N-lauryl-[alpha]-iminodipropionic acid.
    gg. Poly(methylene-p-nonylphenoxy)poly(oxypropylene) propanol; the
poly(oxy-propylene) content averages 4-12 moles.
    hh. Primary n-alkylamines, where the alkyl group (C8-
C18) is derived from coconut, cottonseed, soya, or tallow
acids.
    ii. Sodium butyl naphthalenesulfonate.
    jj. Sodium 1,4-dicyclohexyl sulfosuccinate.
    kk. Sodium 1,4-dihexyl sulfosuccinate.
    ll. Sodium 1,4-diisobutyl sulfosuccinate.
    mm. Sodium 1,4-dipentyl sulfosuccinate.
    nn. Sodium 1,4-ditridecyl sulfosuccinate.
    oo. Sodium mono- and dimethyl naphthalenesulfonate; molecular
weight (in amu) 245-260.
    pp. Sulfosuccinic acid ester with N-(2,-hydroxy-propyl) oleamide,
ammonia and isopropylamine salts of.
    qq. Tall oil diesters with polypropylene glycol (CAS Reg. No.
68648-12-4).
    rr. N,N,N',N''-Tetrakis-(2-hydroxypropyl) ethylenediamine.
    ss. [alpha]-[p-(1,1,3,3-Tetramethylbutyl)phenyl]-[omega]-
hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) mixture of dihydrogen phosphate and
monohydrogen phosphate esters and the corresponding sodium salts of the
phosphate esters; the poly(oxyethylene) content averages 6 to 10 moles.

Sec.  180.930  [Amended]

    4. In Sec.  180.930, the table is amended by removing the following
entries:
    a. [alpha]-Alkyl (C9-C18)-[omega]-
hydroxypoly(oxyethylene): the poly(oxyethylene) content averages 2-20
moles.
    b. [alpha]-Alkyl (C12-C15)-[omega]-
hydroxypoly(oxyethylene/oxypropylene) hetero polymer in which the
oxyethylene content is 8-13 moles and the oxypropylene content is 7-30
moles.
    c. [alpha]-Alkyl (C88-C10)
hydroxypoly(oxypropylene) block polymer with polyoxyethylene;
polyoxypropylene content averages 3 moles and polyoxyethylene content
averages 5-12 moles.
    d. [alpha]-Alkyl (C6-C14)-[omega]-
hydroxypoly(oxypropylene) block copolymer with polyoxyethylene;
polyoxypropylene content is 1-3 moles; polyoxyethylene content is 7-9
moles; average molecular weight (in amu) approximately 635.
    e. [alpha]-(p-Alkylphenyl)-[omega]-hydroxypoly (oxyethylene)
produced by the condensation of 1 mole of alkylphenol (alkyl is a
mixture of propylene tetramer and pentamer isomers and averages
C13) with 6 moles of ethylene oxide.
    f. Amine salts of alkyl (C8-C24)
benzenesulfonic acid (butylamine; dimethylamino propylamine; mono- and
diisopropyl- amine; and mono- , di-, and triethanolamine).
    g. [alpha]-(p-tert-Butylphenyl)-[omega]-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene)
mixture of dihydrogen phosphate and monohydrogen phosphate esters and
the corresponding ammonium, calcium, magnesium, monoethanolamine,
potassium, sodium, and zinc salts of the phosphate esters; the
poly(oxyethylene) content averages 4-12 moles.
    h. [alpha]-(o,p-Dinonylphenyl)-[omega]-hydroxypoly (oxyethylene)
mixture of dihydrogen phosphate and monohydrogen phosphate esters and
the corresponding ammonium, calcium, magnesium, monoethanolamine,
potassium, sodium, and zinc salts of the phosphate esters; the nonyl
group is a propylene trimer isomer and the poly(oxyethylene) content
averages 4-14 moles.
    i. [alpha]-(o,p-Dinonylphenyl)-[omega]-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene),
produced by the condensation of 1 mole of dinonylphenol (nonyl group is
a propylene trimer isomer) with an average of 4-14 moles of ethylene
oxide.
    j. Dodecylbenzenesulfonic acid, amine salts.
    k. [alpha]-(p-Dodecylphenyl)-[omega]-hydroxypoly (oxyethylene)
produced by the condensation of 1 mole of dodecylphenol (dodecyl group
is a propylene tetramer isomer) with an average of 4-14 or 30-70 moles
of ethylene oxide; if a blend of products is used, the average number
of moles of ethylene oxide reacted to produce any product that is a
component of the blend shall be in the range of 4-14 or 30-70 moles.
    l. Ethylene oxide adducts of 2,4,7,9-tetramethyl-5-decynediol, the
ethylene oxide content averages 3.5, 10, or 30 moles.
    m. Ethyl vinyl acetate (CAS Reg. No. 24937-78-8).
    n. [alpha]-Lauryl-[omega]-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene), average
molecular weight (in amu) of 600.
    o. [alpha]-Lauryl-[omega]-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene), sulfate, sodium
salt; the poly(oxyethylene) content is 3-4 moles.
    p. Manganous oxide.
    q. [alpha]-(Methylene (4-(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)-o-
phenylene)bis-[omega]-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) having 6-7.5 moles of
ethylene oxide per hydroxyl group.
    r. Mono-, di-, and trimethylnapthalenesulfonic acids-formaldehyde
condensates, sodium salts.
    s. Naphthalenesulfonic acid and its sodium salt.
    t. [alpha]-(p-Nonylphenyl)-[omega]-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) mixture
of dihydrogen phosphate and monohydrogen phosphate esters and the
corresponding ammonium, calcium, magnesium, monoethanolamine,
potassium, sodium, and zinc salts of the phosphate esters; the nonyl
group is a propylene trimer isomer and the poly(oxyethylene) content
averages 4-14 moles.
    u. [alpha]-(p-Nonylphenyl)-[omega]-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene)
sulfate, and its ammonium, calcium, magnesium, potassium, sodium, and
zinc salts; the nonyl group is a propylene trimer isomer and the
poly(oxyethylene) content averages 4 moles.
    v. [alpha]-(p-Nonylphenyl)-[omega]-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene)
sulfate, and its ammonium, calcium, magnesium, monoethanolamine,
potassium, sodium, and zinc salts; the nonyl group is a propylene
trimer isomer and the poly(oxyethylene) content averages 4-14 or 30-90
moles of ethyiene oxide.
    w. Polyglyceryl phthalate esters of coconut oil fatty acids.
    x. Poly(methylene-p tert-butylphenoxy)poly(oxyethylene) ethanol;
the poly(oxyethylene) content averages 4-12 moles.

    y. Poly(methylene-p-nonylphenoxy)poly(oxyethylene) ethanol; the
poly(oxyethylene) content averages 4-12 moles.
    z. Poly(methylene-p-nonylphenoxy)poly(oxypropylene) propanol; the
poly(oxypropylene) content averages 4-12 moles.
    aa. Secondary alkyl (C11-C15)
poly(oxyethylene) acetate, sodium salt; the ethylene oxide content
averages 5 moles.
    bb. Sodium butylnaphthalenesulfonate.
    cc. Sodium diisobutylnaphthalenesulfonate.
    dd. Sodium isopropylisohexylnaphthalenesulfonate.
    ee. Sodium isopropylnaphthalenesulfonate.
    ff. Sodium monoalkyl and diakyl (C8-C13)
phenoxybenzenedisulfonate mixtures containing not less than 70% of the
monoalkylated product.
    gg. Sodium mono- and dimethylnaphthalenesulfonate, molecular weight
(in amu) 245-260.
    hh. Sodium mono-, di-, and tributylnaphthalenesulfonates.
    ii. Sodium N-oleoyl-N-methyl taurine.
    jj. [alpha]-[p-(1,1,3,3-Tetramethylbutyl)phenyl]-[omega]-
hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) produced by the condensation of 1 mole of p
(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)phenol with a range of 1-14 or 30-70 moles of
ethylene oxide: if a blend of products is used, the average range
number of moles of ethylene oxide reacted to produce any product that
is a component of the blend shall be in the range of 1-14 or 30-70.
    kk. [alpha]-[p-(1,1,3,3-Tetramethylbutyl)phenyl]-[omega]-
hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) produced by the condensation of 1 mole of p-
(1,1,-3,3-tetramethylbutyl) phenol with an average of 4-14 or 30-70
moles of ethylene oxide; if a blend of products is used, the average
number of moles of ethylene oxide reacted to produce any product that
is a component of the blend shall be in the range of 4-14 or 30-70.
    ll. Tridecylpoly(oxyethylene) acetate sodiums salt; where the
ethylene oxide content averages 6-7 moles.

Sec.  180.940  [Amended]

    5. Section 180.940 is amended as follows:
    a. The table in paragraph (a) is amended by removing the following
entries:
    i. [alpha]-Alkyl(C10-C14)-[omega]-
hydroxypoly (oxyethylene) poly(oxypropylene) average molecular weight
(in amu), 768 to 837.
    ii. [alpha]-Alkyl(C12-C18)-[omega]
hydroxypoly (oxyethylene) poly(oxypropylene) average molecular weight
(in amu), 950 to 1120.
    b. The table in paragraph (b) is amended by removing the following
entries:
    i. [alpha]-Lauroyl-[omega]-hydroxypoly (oxyethylene) with an
average of 8-9 moles ethylene oxide, average molecular weight (in amu),
400.
    ii. Oxirane, methyl-, polymer with oxirane, ether with (1,2-
ethanediyldinitrilo)tetrakis [propanol] (4:1).
    c. The table in paragraph (c) is amended by removing the following
entries:
    i. [alpha]-Alkyl(C10-C14)-[omega]-hydroxypoly
(oxyethylene) poly (oxypropylene) average molecular weight (in amu),
768 to 837.
    ii. [alpha]-Alkyl(C11-C15)-[omega]-
hydroxypoly (oxyethylene) with ethylene oxide content 9 to 13 moles.
    iii. [alpha]-Alkyl(C12-C15)-[omega]-
hydroxypoly (oxyethylene) polyoxypropylene, average molecular weight
(in amu), 965.
    iv. [alpha]-Alkyl(C12-C18)-[omega]-
hydroxypoly (oxyethylene) poly(oxypropylene) average molecular weight
(in amu), 950 to 1120.
    v. [alpha]-Lauroyl-[omega]-hydroxypoly (oxyethylene) with an
average of 8-9 moles ethylene oxide, average molecular weight (in amu),
400.
    vi. Naphthalene sulfonic acid, sodium salt.
    vii. Naphthalene sulfonic acid sodium salt, and its methyl,
dimethyl and trimethyl derivatives.
    viii. Naphthalene sulfonic acid sodium salt, and its methyl,
dimethyl and trimethyl derivatives alkylated at 3% by weight with
C6-C9 linear olefins.
    ix. Oxirane, methyl-, polymer with oxirane, ether with (1,2-
ethanediyldinitrilo)tetrakis [propanol] (4:1).
    6. In Sec.  180.960, the table is amended by alphabetically adding
the following entries:

Sec.  180.960  Polymers; exemptions from the requirement of a
tolerance.

* * * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Polymer                              CAS No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                * * * * *
[alpha]-(o,p-Dinonylphenyl)-[omega]-        9014-93-1
 hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) produced by
 condensation of 1 mole of dinonylphenol
 (nonyl group is a propylene trimer
 isomer) with an average of 140-160 moles
 of ethylene oxide
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                * * * * *
[alpha]-(p-Dodecylphenyl)-[omega]-          9014-92-0
 hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) produced by the   26401-47-8
 condensation of 1 mole of dodecylphenol
 (dodecyl group is a propylene tetramer
 isomer) with an average of 30-70 moles of
 ethylene oxide
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                * * * * *
[alpha]-(p-Nonylphenyl)-[omega]-            None
 hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) mixture of
 dihydrogen phosphate and monohydrogen
 phosphate esters and the corresponding
 ammonium, calcium, magnesium,
 monoethanolamine, potassium, sodium, and
 zinc salts of the phosphate esters; the
 nonyl group is a propylene trimer isomer
 and the poly(oxyethylene) content
 averages 30 moles
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[alpha]-(p-Nonylphenyl)-[omega]-            None
 hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) sulfate, and its
 ammonium, calcium, magnesium,
 monoethanolamine, potassium, sodium, and
 zinc salts; the nonyl group is a
 propylene trimer isomer and the
 poly(oxyethylene) content averages 30-90
 moles of ethylene oxide
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                * * * * *
[alpha]-[p-(1,1,3,3-                        9036-19-5
 Tetramethylbutyl)phenyl]-[omega]-          9002-93-1
 hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) produced by the
 condensation of 1 mole of p-(1,1,3,3-
 tetramethylbutyl)phenol with a range of
 30-70 moles of ethylene oxide
                                * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 06-4154 Filed 5-2-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 4 (Monday, January 7, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 921]
[FR Doc No: 2012-31634]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0587; FRL-9733-1]

Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, San Diego
APCD, Northern Sierra AQMD, and Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the San Diego Air
Pollution Control District (SDAPCD), Northern Sierra Air Quality
Management District (NSAQMD), and Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality
Management District (SMAQMD) portions of the California State
Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern volatile organic
compound (VOC) emissions from transfer of gasoline at gasoline
dispensing facilities. We are proposing to approve four local rules to
regulate these emission sources under the Clean Air Act (CAA or the
Act).

DATES: Any comments on this proposal must arrive by February 6, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2012-0587, by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-
line instructions.
    2. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105-3901.

    Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information provided, unless the comment
includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you
consider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as
such and should not be submitted through www.regulations.gov or email.
www.regulations.gov is an ``anonymous access'' system, and EPA will not
know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the
body of your comment. If you send email directly to EPA, your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
public comment. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses.
    Docket: Generally, documents in the docket for this action are
available electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California 94105-3901.
While all documents in the docket are listed at www.regulations.gov,
some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy
location (e.g., copyrighted material, large maps), and some may not be
publicly available in either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard
copy materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business
hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nicole Law, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-
4126<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This proposal addresses the following local
rules: NSAQMD Rule 214 Phase I Vapor Recovery Requirements, SDAPCD Rule
61.4 Transfer of Volatile Organic Compounds into Vehicle Fuel Tanks,
SMAQMD Rule 448 Gasoline Transfer into Stationary Storage Containers,
and SMAQMD Rule 449 Transfer of Gasoline into Vehicle Fuel Tanks. In
the Rules and Regulations section of this Federal Register, we are
approving these local rules in a direct final action without prior
proposal because we believe these SIP revisions are not controversial.
If we receive adverse comments, however, we will publish a timely
withdrawal of the direct final rule and address the comments in
subsequent action based on this proposed rule. Please note that if we
receive adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this
rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the
rule, we may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not
the subject of an adverse comment.
    We do not plan to open a second comment period, so anyone
interested in commenting should do so at this time. If we do not
receive adverse comments, no further activity is planned. For further
information, please see the direct final action.

    Dated: September 5, 2012.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2012-31634 Filed 1-4-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 93 (Monday, May 15, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 30898-30899]
[FR Doc No: 2023-10195]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 3

[Docket Number USCG-2023-0223]

Technical, Organizational, and Conforming Amendments; Sector
Columbia River, WA and Sector North Bend, OR

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rule makes non-substantive changes to Coast Guard
regulations in association with a change in the Coast Guard's internal
organization. The purpose of this rule is to reflect the
disestablishment of Sector North Bend and reorganization of Sector
Columbia River. These changes will have no substantive effect on the
regulated public.

DATES: This rule is effective May 15, 2023.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2023-0223 in the search box and click ``Search.'' Next, in the Document
Type column, select ``Supporting & Related Material.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Lieutenant Katie Graichen, District 13 Legal Office, U.S.
Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

AOR Area of responsibility
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the Port
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
OCMI Officer in Charge of Marine Inspections
OFCO Operating Facility Change Order
SAR Search and rescue
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard implemented the sector construct to consolidate
earlier organizational structures. Within the Thirteenth Coast Guard
District, Sector Columbia River and Sector North Bend have not fully
conformed to the standard sector construct. In 2013, the Coast Guard
amended 33 CFR part 3 to reflect changes in agency organization by
creating and defining Coast Guard sectors that would ``exercise
specific Search and Rescue Mission Coordinator authority over a
designated portion of an encompassing sector's area of
responsibility.'' See 78 FR 39163 (2013). Sector North Bend was one
such sector, receiving Search and Rescue (SAR) Mission Coordinator
authority over a designated portion of Sector Columbia River's
encompassing area of responsibility. See 33 CFR 3.65-20.
    To better align with the standard sector structure and to improve
internal efficiencies, the Coast Guard is reorganizing Sector Columbia
River and Sector North Bend. Specifically, Sector North Bend is being
disestablished, so the regulation granting it special SAR Mission
Coordinator authority is no longer applicable. The geographic
boundaries of Sector Columbia River are not changing, but its office is
moving from Astoria, OR, to Portland, OR.
    We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) before
this final rule. The Coast Guard finds that this rule is exempt from
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A)
because the changes it makes are conforming amendments involving agency
organization. The Coast Guard also finds good cause exists under 5
U.S.C. 553(b)(B) for not publishing an NPRM because the changes will
have no substantive effect on the public, and notice and comment are
therefore unnecessary. For the same reasons, the Coast Guard finds good
cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) to make the rule effective fewer than 30
days after publication in the Federal Register.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 14 U.S.C.
504(a)(2), as delegated at 33 CFR 1.05-1(h), to issue regulations
necessary to implement technical, organizational, and conforming
amendments and corrections to rules, regulations, and notices.
    Operating Facility Change Order (OFCO) No. 034-22 announced the
reorganization of Sector Columbia River and disestablishment of Sector
North Bend. These conforming amendments update the regulation that
describes Sector Columbia River so that it contains current information
and removes the regulation that describes Sector North Bend.
    Under 14 U.S.C. 504(a)(2), the Commandant of the Coast Guard has
the authority to establish and prescribe the purpose of Coast Guard
Shore establishments. And under 33 CFR 1.05-1(h), the Chief of the
Coast Guard's Office of Regulations and Administrative Law has been
delegated authority to issue technical, organizational, and conforming
amendments and corrections to regulations to reflect changes introduced
by OFCO No. 034-22.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    OFCO No. 034-22 announced the reorganization of Sector Columbia
River and disestablishment of Sector North Bend and this rule reflects
that organizational change in part 3 of Title 33 of the Code of Federal
Regulations. OFCO No. 034-22 did not change Sector Columbia River's
Area of Responsibility (AOR) but it relocated its office location. Part
3 of 33 CFR describes the location of U.S. Coast Guard districts,
sectors, and Captain of the Port (COTP) and Officer in Charge of Marine
Inspections (OCMI) zones. This rule amends Sec.  3.65-15 to update the
location of Sector Columbia River's office to Portland, OR.
    This rule also removes Sec.  3.65-20 because it is no longer
necessary after the disestablishment of Sector North Bend. Sector North
Bend's SAR Mission Coordinator authority specified in Sec.  3.65-20
need not be addressed in Sec.  3.65-15. Sector Columbia River
encompasses the AOR of Sector North Bend and, in conformity with other
sector regulations in 33 CFR part 3, SAR Mission Coordinator authority
need not be specified in Sec.  3.65-15.
    Accordingly, this rule does not change Sector Columbia River's
sector, OCMI, or COTP zone boundary lines, nor does it substantively
impact existing regulated navigation area, safety zone, or security
zone regulation, or any naval vessel protection zones. This rule does,
however, revise Sec.  3.01-1 to reflect that after the disestablishment
of Sector North Bend, only one sector remains with specified SAR
Mission Coordinator authority.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    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.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    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 Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, this
rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB).
    This regulatory action determination is based on the finding that
the disestablishment of Sector North Bend and reorganization will have
no substantive effect on the public.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    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.
    For the reasons stated in section V.A above, this rule will not
have a significant economic impact on any member of the public,
including ``small entities.''
    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.

C. Collection of Information

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

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    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.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    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.

F. Environment

    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 consists only of
an organizational amendment. It is categorically excluded from further
review under paragraph L3 of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction
Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 1, Implementation of the National
Environmental Policy Act.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 3

    Organizations and functions (Government agencies).

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 3 as follows:

PART 3--COAST GUARD AREAS, DISTRICTS, SECTORS, MARINE INSPECTION
ZONES, AND CAPTAIN OF THE PORT ZONES

0
1. The authority citation for part 3 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  14 U.S.C. 501, 504; Pub. L. 107-296, 116 Stat. 2135;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 00170.1, Revision No.
01.2.

Sec.  3.01-1   [Amended]

0
2. In Sec.  3.01-1(d)(3) remove the words ``Some specified sectors
exercise'' and add, in their place, the words ``A specified sector
exercises''.

0
3. Revise Sec.  3.65-15 to read as follows:

Sec.  3.65-15   Sector Columbia River Marine Inspection Zone and
Captain of the Port Zone.

    Sector Columbia River's office is located in Portland, OR. The
boundaries of Sector Columbia River's Marine Inspection and Captain of
the Port Zones start at the Washington coast at latitude 47[deg]32'00''
N, longitude 124[deg]21'15'' W, proceeding along this latitude east to
latitude 47[deg]32'00'' N, longitude 123[deg]18'00'' W; thence south to
latitude 46[deg]55'00'' N, longitude 123[deg]18'00'' W; thence east
along this latitude to the eastern Idaho state line; thence southeast
along the Idaho state line to the intersection of the Idaho-Wyoming
boundary; thence south along the Idaho-Wyoming boundary to the
intersection of the Idaho-Utah-Wyoming boundaries; thence west along
the southern border of Idaho to Oregon and then west along the southern
border of Oregon to the coast at latitude 41[deg]59'54'' N, longitude
124[deg]12'42'' W; thence west along the southern boundary of the
Thirteenth Coast Guard District, which is described in Sec.  3.65-10,
to the outermost extent of the EEZ at latitude 41[deg]38'35'' N,
128[deg]51'26'' W; thence north along the outermost extent of the EEZ
to latitude 47[deg]32'00'' N; thence east to the point of origin.

Sec.  3.65-20   [Removed]

0
4. Remove Sec.  3.65-20.

    Dated: May 9, 2023.
Michael T. Cunningham,
Chief, Office of Regulations and Administrative Law.
[FR Doc. 2023-10195 Filed 5-12-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P